Posted on 01/15/2005 2:30:04 PM PST by Prost1
Chaos will flourish in the Middle East if President Bush’s policy continues unchanged
EVEN DONALD RUMSFELD, in his more private moments, must wonder if the invasion of Iraq was really such a good idea. It has become obvious to almost everyone else, including many such as myself who originally supported the war, that it has been a huge mistake. My support was based solely on the evidence of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), on which the intelligence was exaggerated and which Washington has just admitted it is no longer looking for. There is absolutely no evidence that Iraq was supporting al-Qaeda. I believe that the real reason for the war, at least in the US, was to create a reasonably democratic, free-market Iraq to act as both a beacon and a rebuke to other countries in the region. That possibility looks more and more remote. The forthcoming elections look unlikely to produce a government with real authority and legitimacy, or to stop the violence, but they must go ahead; let us hope that they prove a step on the road to normality. Despite the bombing of the UN headquarters in August 2003, the current appalling level of violence did not begin until March 2004, a year after the invasion. It might have been more easily contained if the postwar administration had not made so many early mistakes.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
Saddam wanted to get the sanctions lifted and resume selling his oil.
What you aren't supposed to find out is that he was going to sell it in Euros, not dollars. That would have meant a serious plummet in the dollar.
Iran is planning the same thing.
"A civil war would be a failure and a victory for the insurgents."
Dittos on that ...
Moreover, the 'civil war' theory is a pile of garbage. Iraqis dont want that, just *listen* to the many iraqi politicians, leaders, and the polls; 85% want democracy and a unified and stable Iraq; only Saudis and their pawns in US establishment (paging Brent Scowcroft) that fear a real democratic Iraq want civil war or raise its spectre.
It's a hoax.
Just watch. A democratic Iraq will TOTALLY RESHAPE THE MIDDLE EAST, in ways that will make the turbaned ones in Iran, the Baathists in Syria and the Saudi royal soil themselves.
My buddy Clinton?
Not hardly, I'm a Buchanan/Savage tinfoil hat wearer, not a lefty DUmmie.
Go back to Rense.
You may be able to fool your mother but you ain't foolin me.
No idea what you're talking about.
Look, I'm not upset we went there, I never have been. We thought there was a threat, and we took it out.
However, I don't see many optimistic signs for the future, and think it might be time to cut our losses. That's all, we can agree to disagree, but for my money an Iraqi army will emerge MUCH faster if they really think we're on the way out.
http://truthaboveall.blogspot.com
That's me, if you care to look.
If you want to dismiss me as a Clintonista, feel free, but you are only fooling yourself.
Look, Saddam was worthless. However, he could sell his oil as he saw fit in whatever currency.
You showed your cards, you have laid out all the arguements that leftist whackos talk about. How much lower do you think the dollar will go ?
Funny, an idiot liberal showing how weak he is. They supported the war because politically they couldn't oppose. Weak and pathetic is no way to go through life.
'Funny how we side with the UN on rulings we approve of and condemn them when it's against our interests. '
It might help if you gave a specific example.
"How much lower do you think the dollar will go ?"
No idea, I'm totally ignorant of currency markets and certainly can't see the future.
And by the way, I have NO problem fighting a war for oil at all, if that is the real reason.
They have it, we need it, and the American left won't let us use our own.
"So you think the Sunnis are just going to give up their centuries long hatred of Shia because Allawi "wins" the "election"?"
You are quite ignorant of Iraqi realities. MOST sunni do not hate Shia... a small number of Saddam henchmen and supporters in the Sunni community are killing others to stop democracy in Iraq, because democracy means and end to their power forever.
That small minority - the 10,000 or so who take up arms, and the Sunni supporters around them... are a tiny fraction of Iraq, which has over 25 million people.
That's not a 'civil war', that's a remnant of Baathist/Sunni power. About to go the way of the Confederacy, Carthage, the Third Reich, etc.
"A civil war is INEVITABLE."
Utter BS.
I urge you to go to
http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com
and read this:
http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com/2005/01/iraqis-support-election-will-go-to.html
... linking Iraqi comments about the election. Civil Wars happen when there is not a better mechanism for a society to
determine the political power arrangements. Well there IS a better way - elections, a constitution, and a democratic state. 85% of Iraqis want that and support it, including vast majority of Kurds and Shia, as well as most (if not all) in the Sunni Arab community.
If a Civil War was 'inevitable', it would have happened already. the Iraqi FM has made that point when asked such (mis)leading questions by the press. It hasnt happened because most Iraqis dont support violence, hate the terrorists, and do support a unified country.
Iraqis will choose a unified country and a democratic one, and will pick leaders who will pursue the fight against terrorists.
"Saddam was a threat to the United States?"
.... not any more. he he he.
Then you certainly haven't given much thought to the relative power of the opposing forces.
Not to mention that it will send Pat Buchanan into apoplectic fits. BTW, most of the Baathists in Iraq were Sunnis, so are the Buchananite dweebs saying they want the Baathists back in power?
The war in Iraq is not just about ONE thing. You are not a big picture person and should remain on the sidelines on topics like Iraq.
You mean the opposing forces who have no regard for the Geneva convention by which we hamstring ourselves?
I'd agree with you if we were willing to unleash the FULL capability of our military, but thusfar it seems that we are not.
On the contrary, I see Iraq as a small part to a much bigger picture.
Many here see Iraq as a much more critical lynch pin to the global WOT than I.
Reminder: Vietnam fell to the commies and the Soviet Union still fell to Reagan. (Not saying this is or is not Vietnam II, but just drawing an analogy to "big pictures"...)
See post 36
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.