Was the Iraq War Worth It?

American Thinker ^ | June 02, 2008 | Jeff Lukens

[max americana]

I’ve had the same article/question asked since 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and I have the same answer: F’N yes.

[philly-d-kidder]

Of Course it made us even more of a Lethal Power in Learning Urban Combat with our Strijing Power!

[Mr Ramsbotham]

Someone’s ass needed to be kicked, and Iraq was the ideal candidate for the role. Large-scale terrorism requires state sponsorship, and if the states are afraid to do the sponsoring, terrorism will take a huge hit.

[txhurl]

About 5 years ago, W, in a candid moment that nobody noticed, though I’m sure the video can be found, said we could go into Depression if we didn’t handle the ME carefully.

He was being honest about how we could all go back to eating grubs if the oil flow wasn’t protected.

I wish I could find that clip. It’s the most Presidential moment I’ve seen from him. He actually brought up the D word, at a time of growth, and he said it with alarm.

[Paleo Conservative]

This we know, Saddam had Weapons of Mass Destruction. He even gassed his own Kurd and Shiite populations in the 1980s. What happened to those chemical weapons? Who knows? Whether they buried them in the ground somewhere or trucked off to Syria, we had every reason to believe he had them.

Damn! I'm suing for plagerism. I said exactly those same points on many posts on Free Republic.

[Ricebug]

My vote; F’N YES also!!

[Berlin_Freeper]

It’s half worth it.

Iran is the other half.

[SolidWood]

100% Ditto. Afghanistan and Iraq are unfinished business as long as the Mullahs rule Iran.

[Terpfen]

Bush had a similar problem with Donald Rumsfeld and generals who would not adapt to insurgents who did not wear uniforms and hid among the people. Bush finally replaced Rumsfeld and found his Generals in David Petraeus and Ray Odierno. The counterinsurgency strategy they employed made quick work of our enemies in Iraq.

Bush didn't have a problem with Rumsfeld. The Democrats did.

[SolidWood]

Rumsfeld was wrong on troop levels. Hindsight is 50/50 but the surge should have taken place earlier. Despite their unpopularity among many here on FR, McCain and Kristol were right on this all along.

[highlander_UW]

Was the Iraq War Worth It?

Well, if you're a liberal, the answer is NO...no way Americans should be dying for a bunch of brown skinned people....but that's because liberals are inherently racists.

[Aria]

I think history will be good to W.

[paristwelve]

Me too. He did what he had to do with a situation he inherited from the Clinton administration and international organizations without installing a strongman regime.

[Steel Wolf]

Was which Iraq war worth what to whom?

Which war are we talking about? The initial invasion? The early occupation? The overthrow of the Baathists? Or later, when we tried our hand at nation building, or later still when we first realized we needed to switch to counterinsurgency mode. There have been lots of little wars against AQI and JAM, Sunni extremism and Iranian influence. Some are resolved, some are ongoing. Which war do we mean?

What value are we talking about? Taxpayer dollars? Human life? U.S. prestige? All parties involved have paid a number of prices. Some of them low by historic standards, some of them high. Are we getting a good return on our investment?

Who are we talking about this value applying to? The U.S. taxpayer? The U.S. citizen, who wants to send a message the U.S. will not stand for Saddam's thuglike actions and WMD ambitions? The Soldier on his 4th rotation? The Sunni who hasn't had regular electrical power since the invasion? The Kurdish nationalist who no longer has to worry about Saddam's goons disappearing him and his family? The Shia laborer who's now free to be as fundamentalist and extreme as he wants in his religious practice, without a secular government to hold him back? The average European, who's afraid of inflamed tensions with their aggressive Muslim minorities?

The answer to 'Was Iraq worth it?' depends deeply on what you project onto the question. It's easy to argue one way or the other, for whatever result you want.

[Gondring]

Rumsfeld was wrong on troop levels. Hindsight is 50/50 but the surge should have taken place earlier. Despite their unpopularity among many here on FR, McCain and Kristol were right on this all along.

You are right, SolidWood. Rumsfeld cost this country so very much. As inspiring as he was for the initial offensive operations, it would have been nice if he could have been a positive influence after...but he failed to appreciate the change in the situation, and his arrogant dismissal of the generals who did recognize the changing situation (remember the patronizing condescention against Gen. Pace?) kept us bogged down in ineffectiveness.

But remember that ultimately, it is the responsibility of George W. Bush. Sec. Rumsfeld offerred to resign, but Pres. Bush kept him on. If only the initial resignation had been accepted, we could be remembering Sec. Rumsfeld as having led a brilliant campaign to take Iraq, and thousands of Americans and Iraqis would still alive, with hundreds of billions of dollars saved, with Al Q on the ropes years sooner.

But then again, if Pres. Bush did not have such loyalty to his close associates, perhaps he wouldn't be where he is today...and we'd have had AlGore in there.

[DB]

One could argue that Iraq had to come to the low point that it did just prior the surge in order for there to be success overall. The blood letting that Arabs perpetrated on fellow Arabs that we refused to do ourselves when we invaded provided the public turning point against the barbarians among them. They were faced with the true cost of what the Islamist had planned for them or cooperation with us towards peace and self governance.

[conservativepoet]

“tolerant values toward women”...Isn’t there a better way to say this? Tolerating someone just doesn’t quite capture the magic.

[Thrownatbirth]

The author forgets the “no-pest strip” strategy which essentially depopulated Islam of its more virulent anti-US mental cases. They flocked to Iraq on Bush’s dare (Bring ‘em on!) and were slaughtered like pigs.

[Skooz]

bump