T Nation

Do You Support the War?

I am talking about Iraq.

The more I learn about the history of our wars, and why we go to war (9/11, pearl harbor, gulf of tonkin), details about this current war, etc. The harder it becomes to support war.

The SOF agreement was just the icing on the cake. They want us gone–yet we want to stay.

What members support this war–and why?

EDIT: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=6ef_1227287977

I believe America went to war because evil men took innocent American lives.

I also believe you do not start something you can’t finish and frankly the war is not finished.

I also feel; however, if the Iraq people don’t want us there and they feel they can get the job done themselves then it is time to come home.

I have said this many times on here. I am not against the war. I am against the way the war was prosecuted.

Since Korea, the US has tried to fight friendly wars. They lead to Viet Nam’s and Iraq’s.

We should have used extreme prejudice to exterminate the enemy. We left entirely too many people alive, and too many mosques standing.

If you are going to go to war it should be to destroy the enemy, not try to make friends and pass out food.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I have said this many times on here. I am not against the war. I am against the way the war was prosecuted.

Since Korea, the US has tried to fight friendly wars. They lead to Viet Nam’s and Iraq’s.

We should have used extreme prejudice to exterminate the enemy. We left entirely too many people alive, and too many mosques standing.

If you are going to go to war it should be to destroy the enemy, not try to make friends and pass out food. [/quote]

Yes the old saxon view, never leave behind you a man woman or child that can ever carry a sword,

Personally how I view war too.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I also believe you do not start something you can’t finish and frankly the war is not finished.
[/quote]

“If the diagnosis was wrong we must change the treatment.”-Ron Paul

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I believe America went to war because evil men took innocent American lives.

[/quote]

supposedly. Although there is just too much evidence to ignore that says this wasnt the case.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I have said this many times on here. I am not against the war. I am against the way the war was prosecuted.

Since Korea, the US has tried to fight friendly wars. They lead to Viet Nam’s and Iraq’s.

We should have used extreme prejudice to exterminate the enemy. We left entirely too many people alive, and too many mosques standing.

If you are going to go to war it should be to destroy the enemy, not try to make friends and pass out food. [/quote]

big proponent of atomic bombs, eh.

I dont think the problem is that we left to many alive–the problem is we only had a 2 week plan. We never thought of how we would act as the occupiers.

Read Bob Woodward’s latest, The War Within. Essentially, Bush just wanted to WIN in Iraq, so he pushed his personal views against the recommendations of most of his staff and all the generals who had to run the thing.

But he failed to realize that body counts and capturing the enemy doesn’t amount to winning in Iraq. Winning in Iraq can only be done politically, not militarily.

Let’s hope Obama can formalize a plan. Iraq is no threat to us, Afghanistan is. Continuing to dump billions into a country with a $5 billion surplus of oil money is ridiculous. Eventually, the US will have to cut their losses, but Bush and his cowboy mentality have prevented that.

[quote]reshumate wrote:
Iraq is no threat to us, Afghanistan is. Continuing to dump billions into a country with a $5 billion surplus of oil money is ridiculous. Eventually, the US will have to cut their losses, but Bush and his cowboy mentality have prevented that.[/quote]

Ok then, tell me how long it would take for Iran to take it over, or the Taliban? It’s like trying to part water.

If we move out, they will move in, plain and simple…and untill we actually fight a REAL FUCKING WAR and erraticate them all…the way it should be done, this won’t stop.

[quote]Rockscar wrote:
reshumate wrote:
Iraq is no threat to us, Afghanistan is. Continuing to dump billions into a country with a $5 billion surplus of oil money is ridiculous. Eventually, the US will have to cut their losses, but Bush and his cowboy mentality have prevented that.

Ok then, tell me how long it would take for Iran to take it over, or the Taliban? It’s like trying to part water.

If we move out, they will move in, plain and simple…and untill we actually fight a REAL FUCKING WAR and erraticate them all…the way it should be done, this won’t stop.

[/quote]

Yeah! And if we happen to kill another hundred thousand innocent brown fuckers… oh well, right?

Wait… who’s the good guys again?

My feeling are that if the Iraqi people want us gone, then we should leave. However, as long as we are still wanted over there, then we should always work towards victory. Lets face it, we’re there, and we can’t go back in time and have a “do over”. The responsible thing to do is to stay and help Iraq transform into a self sustaining, stable country as long as we can.

I also think that we need to drastically reduce our presence around the globe, and by drastically, I mean drastically. We can bomb anywhere in the world in a matter of hours, right here from US soil. We could beef up our navy and maintain a world wide presence from international waters. We should close most of our bases on foreign soil and bring the troops home. And most importantly, we need to get the fuck out of the UN, and end the defense treaties that we have with foreign nations.

These defense pacts do nothing but guarantee that the US could be dragged into a war which we may not want or need.

[i]“Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations ? entangling alliances with none.” ~ Thomas Jefferson

“The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations to have as little political connection as possible… Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalships, interest, humor, or caprice?.. It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world.” ~ George Washington[/i]

BTW: I am currently reading Ron Pauls Book “A Foreign Policy of Freedom”, and yes, I am drinking from the Ron Paul kool aid jug.

[quote]Rockscar wrote:
reshumate wrote:

Ok then, tell me how long it would take for Iran to take it over, or the Taliban? It’s like trying to part water.

If we move out, they will move in, plain and simple…and untill we actually fight a REAL FUCKING WAR and erraticate them all…the way it should be done, this won’t stop.

[/quote]

and if Iran takes over Iraq//… what than?
erradicate all people whose views are different than yours?

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
My feeling are that if the Iraqi people want us gone, then we should leave. However, as long as we are still wanted over there, then we should always work towards victory. Lets face it, we’re there, and we can’t go back in time and have a “do over”. The responsible thing to do is to stay and help Iraq transform into a self sustaining, stable country as long as we can.

I also think that we need to drastically reduce our presence around the globe, and by drastically, I mean drastically. We can bomb anywhere in the world in a matter of hours, right here from US soil. We could beef up our navy and maintain a world wide presence from international waters. We should close most of our bases on foreign soil and bring the troops home. And most importantly, we need to get the fuck out of the UN, and end the defense treaties that we have with foreign nations.

These defense pacts do nothing but guarantee that the US could be dragged into a war which we may not want or need.

[i]“Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations ? entangling alliances with none.” ~ Thomas Jefferson

“The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations to have as little political connection as possible… Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalships, interest, humor, or caprice?.. It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world.” ~ George Washington[/i]

BTW: I am currently reading Ron Pauls Book “A Foreign Policy of Freedom”, and yes, I am drinking from the Ron Paul kool aid jug.

[/quote]

“[America] goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom.”

  • John Quincy Adams

If we would have just let it alone, we wouldn’t have to worry about the Taliban or Iran taking it over.

[quote]Rockscar wrote:
reshumate wrote:
Iraq is no threat to us, Afghanistan is. Continuing to dump billions into a country with a $5 billion surplus of oil money is ridiculous. Eventually, the US will have to cut their losses, but Bush and his cowboy mentality have prevented that.

Ok then, tell me how long it would take for Iran to take it over, or the Taliban? It’s like trying to part water.

[/quote]

The Taliban?! A rural Pashtun insurgency over a thousand miles away is going to take over Iraq? Wow.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I have said this many times on here. I am not against the war. I am against the way the war was prosecuted.

Since Korea, the US has tried to fight friendly wars. They lead to Viet Nam’s and Iraq’s.

We should have used extreme prejudice to exterminate the enemy. We left entirely too many people alive, and too many mosques standing.

If you are going to go to war it should be to destroy the enemy, not try to make friends and pass out food. [/quote]

x2

Damn good post.

[quote]Christine wrote:
If we would have just let it alone, we wouldn’t have to worry about the Taliban or Iran taking it over.[/quote]

Are you saying just let someone destroy the towers in new york and attempt the pentagon and not respond in any way,

[quote]apbt55 wrote:
Christine wrote:
If we would have just let it alone, we wouldn’t have to worry about the Taliban or Iran taking it over.

Are you saying just let someone destroy the towers in new york and attempt the pentagon and not respond in any way, [/quote]

Well if you response is to throw a tantrum, attack one country that has nothing to do with it and fail to catch the real culprits in the next while also leveling that country, well yes, not responding would be an awesome alternative.

You even might have time and money left to catch, like , Bin Laden?

[quote]THE_CLAMP_DOWN wrote:
big proponent of atomic bombs, eh.[/quote]

Not at all. Just not a proponent of peaceful wars.

We should have never been an occupier. That was the peaceful war part that should have been avoided. Destroy the enemy. If you haven’t the guts for that, then don’t start the war.

[quote]THE_CLAMP_DOWN wrote:
usmccds423 wrote:
I also believe you do not start something you can’t finish and frankly the war is not finished.

“If the diagnosis was wrong we must change the treatment.”-Ron Paul

usmccds423 wrote:
I believe America went to war because evil men took innocent American lives.

supposedly. Although there is just too much evidence to ignore that says this wasnt the case.[/quote]

I wouldn’t go to NY and say that.

[quote]orion wrote:
apbt55 wrote:
Christine wrote:
If we would have just let it alone, we wouldn’t have to worry about the Taliban or Iran taking it over.

Are you saying just let someone destroy the towers in new york and attempt the pentagon and not respond in any way,

Well if you response is to throw a tantrum, attack one country that has nothing to do with it and fail to catch the real culprits in the next while also leveling that country, well yes, not responding would be an awesome alternative.

You even might have time and money left to catch, like , Bin Laden?[/quote]

We have talked about this before. The US had reliable intelligence that Iraq specifically Saddam Hussein was either involved in or allowed terrorist to attack American soil from Iraq.

We went in to stop a man that killed thousands of his own country men, and have been searching for Bin Laden ever since. I have read several reports plus talked to people that have been there. The US military has had opportunities to capture or kill Bin laden, but either the US, Iraq, or Pakistan government has gotten in the way.

I didn’t know retaliating against attacks against your own is considered a tantrum? I always thought you should stand up for those that can’t stand up for them.