“…since there will never be a ticker-tape parade down Fifth Avenue.”
95 Replies to “Victory in Iraq Day”
ET:
This spring’s election will be, what, the fifth in Iraq?
People risked much to go to the polls and they even got it right by dipping a voter’s finger in purple ink … that would rule out the multiple voting encouraged by ACORN in the US.
In that sense, Iraq seems to have a more effective way of keeping voter fraud down.
It’s a fact the vast majority of the Iraqi people despise the foreign invaders … those would be the al-Qaida types.
No democracy is perfect and no free society is totally free from asshats who use their freedom to spit on the concept of freedom.
But, they’re free to do so here. Wouldn’t get that chance in a marxist, fascist or Islamic republic.
Spout away asshats.
war’s over folks. Victory is ours…never mind 235 Iraqi security forces and civlian deaths this month or the 14 americans who have died thus far in novemeber.
“Mookie Al Sadr’s supporters burning Bush in effigy”
Mookie el sadr is…a Shia as I recall. Most Iraqis are. The ones who are supposed to like bush the most, ya know; for setting them free. Really, I think they are waiting to kill all them sunnis and join up with Iran soon as we get outta there. So I guess we gotta stay forever. Yea! Everything moving along like a well oiled plan ought to.
Yep, there are always people in any democracy who will spit on individual freedom.
Even happens in a fledgling democracy like Iraq.
I see a lot of Acorns falling.
jp- the headline is ‘victory in Iraq day’. That means a victory for the agenda of the war, which was to free the Iraqi people and enable democracy to emerge.
That’s a reality; we are acknowledging that reality. The fact that there are still Al Qaeda around; that there are still intra-Iraq tribal tensions for power; the fact that Iran and Syria are still trying to stir up trouble – that’s another reality. As I said, you can’t overcome the centuries of tribal fighting and the emergence of Islamic fascism in a year or even a few years. But you can destroy the infrastructure that supports them. And that is exactly what has occurred.
Therefore, these ‘other realities’ don’t and can’t deny the first one; that freedom and democracy has emerged in Iraq. That is what so many of us have supported, and are supporting. It’s something to celebrate. Freedom matters.
Renounce this heresy about this
To say that today, November 22, 2008 is Victory in Iraq Day is ridiculous and you all know it. You can’t just pick a date out of thin air and declare “Peace”.
JP:
Just did.
Try and stop it.
JP:
Just declared today as the day of victory, that is.
The only ‘peace’ anybody can create is inner peace.
Nobody can change the world, since evil will always find a way to sucker in enough weak human beings and make them believe the evil they do against other human beings is somehow the will of a higher power. Of course it is, the power of evil is stronger than an undisciplined human being.
The only worthy control is self-control, something that seems foreign to the Islamic extremists.
It’s about time people said “Victory in Iraq” in this modern day, it really doesn’t get much better and it certain is happening faster and better than the UN has been able to do in the Congo. The victory is in two parts, (4 if you want to get picky) first the initial invasion was accomplished in about 3 weeks with minimal loss of life on both sides, partly due to the Iraqi walking away from their posts, mainly because the Iraq army was constantly out fought, out manoeuvred and out thought by the US military. Compare this to the Iran-Iraq war where Iran was unable to make any headway over a period of 10years and with a combined causality rate of approx. 1.2million dead and millions wounded.
The 2nd part was the occupation, which in all fairness the US bungled badly and much of the blame falls on Rummy’s shoulders, had Gates been in charge I suspect things would have been different. In fact Michael Yon warned that Civil War was basically starting and if the US didn’t do something quick the country would be lost. The US Army and Marine Corp to their credit did an about face and reinvented themselves on the spot changing their tactics and creating the surge. The US did have some help, the AQI bungled the insurgency so badly that they basically drained the swamp they were hiding in and stuck out like sore thumbs. While they are still dangerous, they have totally lost the support of the people caused by their intense and barbaric cruelty to the average Iraq both Sunni and Shia. The military also out played Sadar who also bungled his chances and Iran is scrambling to reposition itself with the Shia government currently in power.
There is lots to go wrong and I expect it will, but it is now up to the Iraqis to sort it out, the US did what they could to sort out their problems and the respect for the US military is pretty high amongst the average Iraqi who likely trust them more than their own government. When I ask people opposed to the war, what they would have done in regards to the collapse of the sanctions, the lack of interest in carrying out the UNSC terms and conditions. Russia, China and France’s interest in accessing the oil fields and thereby financing Saddam to rebuild his army, I would say that less than 1% of the people I talked have any sort of a plan based on the reality of the ground.
ET
You can spout your pseudointellectual hogwash all you want. Perhaps adopting the superior tone of “You seem to have no understanding of…” impresses those in your environment. But none of your arguments hold water on examination. They are the rantings of an unhinged partisan desperately trying to justify the unjustifiable. And throwing a lot academic words on top of it all for extra measure.
Has it really come down to phrases like “factual belief” for your kind, ET? If it was a ‘belief’ why was it stated as a certainty by Cheney? What possible reason for that could there be other than that they knew they had a weak case for war that the public wouldn’t accept so they had to embroider and make up stuff to gin up the fear.
Contrary to your belief I’ve watched more than a few Bush speeches over the last 8 years, and in the run-up tothe war I heard a minute amount of time devoted to democracy in Iraq as compared to the “smoking gun becoming the mushroom cloud”, re-iterated like a drum beat by him and Rice. For a factual belief it sure got a lot of airplay – this insinuation that if they didn’t go to war a Hiroshima would take place in America.
Again: what a namby-pamby cowardly word-parsing on your part – ‘factual belief’. It’s an intellectual disgrace, and evidence of the emptiness of your argument.
Your assertion that my objection to the Iraq war is owing to my irratonal animus towards Bush reflects a concerning trend towards delusion on your part. I say delusion because I didn’t once mention Bush in my post, and so for you to make such as assessment goes under your usual tactic of: just making stuff up. But that you do so when the evidence is here for all to see that your claim has no factual basis – well, excuse me for saying, but that’s just kind of…crazy.
I know, I know, you can’t help yourself in your sheer, tired, stale partisan hackery: the idea that anyone who disagreed with the war, or torture, or wiretapping – or anything the Bush adminsistration did – was suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome (how clever!), it worked so well for you all those years!
But now the whole country has BDS, huh, ET? Because he’s the most hated President in history now, ET. Below Nixon in the depths of diagrace of Watergate. Imagine that! That old saw just don’t work anymore, ET.
And it especially doesn’t work when the person you’re arguing against hasn’t even mentioned Bush, much less expressed animus towards him. That only exposes the fact that your arguments are partisan reflexes, not actual fact-based reasonings or refutations, but just slimey, dishonest smears designed to shut down debate. Well, it worked for awhile, didn’t it?
AS for your other smear, it’s difficult to see how your charge that I ‘follow the crowd’ can be true since I opposed the war back in those years when it remained quite popular. You are the one who followed the crowd, but then the crowd got smart – i.e., reponded with reason and logic to observable material reality. – you didn’t. So now you’re stuck with Orwellspeak like “factual belief” and smearing your opponent to distract from the fact that you can’t make your case.
Since the war is over and…we won, why doncha all book a flight on over to get a heapin’ helpin’ of free messopotamia? Perhaps walk from your hotel in the green zone out into now peaceful bagdad where the locals will shower you with love and rose petals…don’t forget to send postcards.
Jp, real, Y’all – go ahead – ask the bad guys in Iraq if they don’t feel that they got their ass kicked a thousand ways to hell. They might just tell you they did. If they say they are winning or they have won this thing – they’re lying.
Kind of reminds me of the bridge keeper in the Holy Grail movie. “Its just a flesh wound. Come back here and I’ll bite your knee cap.”
The war is won – no doubt about that. The challenge is to maintain stability and allow this new democracy to flourish.
JP, real and the rest of the naysayers cannot bring themselves to admit that Bush’s boys and girls have done the job. Their hate for him would never allow them to. Take Slevin’s comment “Iraq continues to be a total disaster.” Ya right, Slevin. I agree with the declaration that on one else is willing to make. NOVEMBER 22, 2008 – VICTORY IN IRAQ!!!.
real – again, you don’t seem to ‘get it’.
A ‘factual belief’ isn’t ‘Orwellian’; it’s a well-known philosophical phrase for a belief or conclusion based on facts. It contrasts with an ‘intuitive belief’ which doesn’t rest on facts but on personal emotion; or a ‘hypothetical belief’ which is a conclusion that rests on an assumed hypothesis. And there are others: moral belief, which is a belief resting on a moral system. Religious belief…etc. The fact that you’ve never heard of the phrase – well, that’s your problem.
Again, the WMD was a conclusion based on facts (and I’m not even going to define the gassing of the Kurds as an action of a WMD, though it was). But, based on their evidence, the US-UK concluded that Saddam’s actions of developing a nuclear weapon were real and not rhetoric. After all, the UN sanctions against him weren’t because he was doing nothing. Or, are you assuming that the UN sanctions were irrelevant?
You haven’t dealt with my arguments, for example, against your statements that democracy can be imposed; that Iraq was ‘invaded for oil’. You haven’t provided any proof of your assertion that Iraq was invaded for oil- and one lifted phrase from Greenspan is hardly evidence.
You haven’t explained how Iraq is a ‘disaster’ in your view; nor have you examined the relation between tribal dictatorships in the ME and the existence of Islamic fascism.
As for ‘smearing your opponent’, my telling you to read up on history and the nature of Islamic fascism is hardly a smear. It’s a criticism of your lack of knowledge of the situation.
“I agree with the declaration that on (sic) one else is willing to make. NOVEMBER 22,2008- VICTORY IN IRAQ!!!”
No-one is willing to make that declaration (except some bloggers) because it’s the blackest of lies. Today is November 23, 2008 and the war/occupation continues.
Al Sadr has always wanted to see himself running Iraq – and has opposed the US in the hope that by doing so, he will be swept to power by his countrymen. He is an opportunist, and willing to kick apart any progress made to date if it serves his ends. The fact that he is Shia is as important as the fact Hitler was raised Catholic; it may speak to what he will do to those from other sects/religions once he gets power but does not make him necessarily the only correct answer to Whither Iraq?
Again, the WMD was a conclusion based on facts ET
Nonsense, it was based on lies and propaganda, as anyone with an IQ above their shoe size knew at the time.
manny, please provide evidence for your, ah, hypothetical belief. Thanks.
It’s a factual belief.
I knew Colin Powell’s little performance at the UN was a charade. So did Scott Ridder. But ET, being incapable of critical thought, blinded as she is by partisan animus, bought that song and dance hook, line and sinker. And only she knows her shoe size for sure.
I mean, my gawd, didn’t you learn anything from that babies being wrested from their incubators swindle from Gulf I??? There are none so blind…
Maybe it was wrong to invade Iraq, but to assert Hussein wasn’t developing of possessed WMD flies in the face of documentary evidence provided by UN inspectors, who not only saw these weapons, but inventorized them. The only question is what happened to them – were they destroyed, or shipped to another state (like Syria)?
If indeed UN inspectors were liars or deluded, why did Hussein continue his obfuscation? Nobody, IMO, has provided a satisfactory answer to that question.
BTW, why would US invade Iraq so China, Russia, Germany and France could secure their access to their oil?
People need to do some research and think a bit before they tell others what is “factual.”
Personally, I was against the invasion. But, there were some benefits, such as the AQ miscalculation that Iraq could be their next base of operations. All their involvement did was seal their fate in Iraq, presenting themselves as a target for US forces, while totally alienating the Iraqi people. That miscalculation also degraded AQ to where they are far less capable, and therefore dangerous, than they were.
I see no evidence whatsoever that the invasion of Iraq made US and West more vulnerable to terrorism. Believing it doesn’t make it so, and we will see in the long run which view holds.
As for victory in Iraq, I’m not sure we’re there yet. But, continued hostilities isn’t evidence either. Democracy is about the majority ruling; if a minority make trouble that doesn’t automatically mean failure, or even lack of victory.
Once US invaded Iraq, it was obligated to take the fight to the other foreign invaders, AQ; otherwise they would have created a far more dangerous situation than allegedly existed before.
Again, IMO, the proper doctrine for Iraq was containement, GWB chose to change to pre-emption. Many think he was wrong to do so, but that cannot logically be seen to negate any possible good coming from the invasion.
manny, again, provide some factual evidence for your conclusion that the issue of WMD in Iraq was ‘all lies and propaganda’. Your reference to Colin Powell doesn’t provide the facts about the UN sanctions for Iraq renewing its WMD program.
You state that you ‘knew’ that Powell’s performance was a ‘charade’. Could you provide us with the facts that led to your knowledge?
As for the ‘babies in incubators’, what does this have to do with WMD? Could you explain? Thanks.
shamrock – nice post with reference to the WMD and the UN, and the rejection of the ‘the war was about oil’ argument. However, I think that the main agenda of the war was to destabilize the tribal infrastructures of the ME, by enabling one state to set itself up as a democracy.
Since I maintain that the cause of Islamic fascism is a population living in a tribal infrastructure, when its population is too large for such a system, and when its transition to an industrial economy negates a tribal infrastructure and requires democracy – then, I think that the US led war, to enable democracy to emerge in the ME, was a correct action, as defined by the ‘just war’ theory.
As for the ‘babies in incubators’, what does this have to do with WMD? Could you explain? Thanks.
It has to do with the willingly credulous being so easily suckered with lies and propaganda. Beyond that, attempting to fill the gaps of your limited knowledge is a exercise in futility.
Or, to put it country simple, et, as a republican deep thinker once put it: Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, won’t get fooled again.
no, manny, that’s not a factual explanation. That’s a red herring tactic where you try to diver the legitimate request for information into a spurious ad hominem charge.
Again, what does the ‘babies in incubators’ have to do with WMD? That’s a legitimate request, for I can’t see any relation between the two.
The UN Sanctions, esp. Resolution 687, focused on WMD. Again, would you provide some facts rather than hyperbolic rants? Thanks.
Manny – “I knew that Colin Powell’s little performance at the UN was a charade.” So Manny, how about sharing what the next hot stock tip is going to be or when and where the next major earthquake will happen. How about some Powerball Numbers oh wise one.
Funny I don’t remember any guy named “Manny” being interviewed on TV spouting this amazing wisdom and knowledge he possessed.
Lets leave history to the historians. Those of us presently living in what will be future history are a little too jaded to be as objective as true historians of the future. Dwight Eisenhower knew this all too well when he directed that a complete photographic record be kept for future generations of the horrors of Hitler’s concentration camps. Today there are those who are revisionists when it comes to events of WW2 but the record is there for all to see just as the record will be there for today’s events.
Just as the record now shows that the Allies had to stay in Europe and in Asia for a transition to normalcy, the record will show that the US and its allies in Iraq had to do the same thing to preserve the new democracy. There is no doubt in clear thinking logical people that this war is won.
I assure you, btw, that nowhere in the record will you see that “Manny knew that Colin Powell’s little performance before the UN was a charade.”
Ah, make that Sisyphean futility.
Or perhaps the mother of all futilities.
manny, it isn’t an argument to simply post irrelevant ad hominem ‘put-downs’. It’s a red herring to state that you won’t provide any facts because you state that I have a ‘limited knowledge’. Heh. Prove it. You are moving into an ‘argumentum ad nauseum’ state.
Again, manny, give us some facts that validate your conclusions. Facts.
“Nonsense, it was based on lies and propaganda, as anyone with an IQ above their shoe size knew at the time. … It’s a factual belief.” – manny.
“Google = Iraq + uranium + Canada” – jwkozak91
ET, it isn’t an argument to regurgitate Bush/Rove talking points and dress it up with your crackpot theories about tribalist Islamofacsism. There fact that there were no WMDs validates my conclusion.
Actually, manny, my theories about tribalism aren’t crackpot; they are a pretty standard analysis of the political organization of a tribe versus a non-tribal societal system.
Since you haven’t done any research in these areas, then, you are making the error of an ‘argumentum ad ignorantum…an argument based on ignorance.
Furthermore, you obviously don’t know the nature of democracy, and how it operates within a population large enough to enable a middle class; that’s an industrial economy. If your population gets as large as an industrial one, and retains its tribal political mode – that’s a dysfunctional society. Basic political and societal theory. Nothing to do with Bush/Rove arguments.
You still haven’t presented an argument for your assertions which seem to rest not in facts but only in your subjective feelings, including the Colin Powell speech which you ‘intuitively’ knew was invalid, including your ‘babies in incubators’.
Now, you are claiming that no WMD were found; that wasn’t the point. Do you know the reasons for the UN sanctions, in particular, Res. 687; it was about WMD and inspections. I wonder why the UN bothered to set up such sanctions and such a resolution? Hmmm? Facts, manny – they are important.
Oh, and I can think on my own, manny. I don’t copy Bush or anyone. I’m aware of the different societal and political structures; I know the nature of fascism; I know the developmental history of Islamic fascism; I know the enormous economic and demographic changes of the ME for the past 100 plus years. I know what happesn to a society when its societal systems become unable to ‘fit’ together.
I wonder if you’ve bothered to obtain a similar knowledge, or do you rely only on your subjective impressions and what you hear on the MSM?
Hey ET
I consider it to be a smear when someone suggests I don’t hold a position in good faith because it’s my considered opinion but because I have an irrational animus towards someone.
As I noted earlier, your smear is also a proven fabrication since there had been no mention in my posts of Bush up to that time, or any evidence of animus towards him.
And so your assertion falls under the category of
“baseless smear”. Or rather – demonstrably baseless smear.
But why would you make such a demonstrably baseless assertion?
Because you know your argument is weak, and so you must harriedly come up with stuff to distract from that fact. The sad thing is you think you’re putting one over on the rest of us.
You really are like a pathetic old punch drunk fighter, deluding yourself that your punches are landing anywhere. Attributing criticism of the war to hatred of Bush when Bush hasn’t even been mentioned! Wow, what an intellecual triumph. Did you ever think you’d fall so far, ET?
Allow me to answer on behalf of Manny: his reference to “babies being thrown from incubators” is about the fabrication of that story used to sell the public on the first Iraq war. He was drawing a parallel between that and the fabrication of the WMD (Irag is going to nuke us) being used to sell the public on the 2nd Iraq war.
You see, the story about the babies, like Cheney’s assertion that “We know for a fact that Saddam has WMD” was a baldfaced lie. A fabrication rather like your assertion that my opinions are a result of my hatred of Bush.
Your attempt to diminish others with your supposed vast knowledge of tribalism et al is handicapped by the fact that most of what you spout are hypotheses. You speak as though your hypotheses have been proven. They have not been.
As for your attempts to impress by dropping in factoids like democracy operating in a population large enough to sustain a middle class – well, that’s nice ET. Thanks for this display of your ‘erudition’. I’m afraid you’re giving the impression of a not very bright person trying to come off as … well, as the archetype of what a not very bright person thinks ‘smart people’ sound like.
Because for all your talk, the war is not over, and American lives haven’t stopped being sacrificed for what remains nothing more than hypothesis on your part. That’s what you’re trying to distract us from with all your lying and your attempts to diminish others.
As well, if we examine your arguments closely we find their real origin: in your kneejerk Obama/Clinton disparagements earlier, and in your bizarre, baseless ‘Bush hater’ accusation we discern the outlines of the partisan hack: far greater than your concern about tribal societies of the ME is your need to defend your ideology above all else. For one who is concerned about democracy in foreign lands, your shameless allegiance to ‘party over country’ reveals a questionable loyalty to democracy in America.
C’mon Manny – still waiting for those Powerball numbers!! ET – you want substance to Manny’s postings and so would I and I assume many others. As Manny states it “there are none so blind…… (we all know the quote). To Manny I would reply – There are none so naked as those who will not dress themselves with ‘FACTS”!!!!
Facts! Manny, Facts!!!!
A belated congratulations to all the American servicemen and women, the servicemen and women of the coalition forces, the members of the Iraqi armed forces and police, and most of all, the Iraqi people themselves for their magnificent achievement in undertaking the long, arduous and dangerous journey of transforming a country ruled by a dictator into a democratic state where freedom and prosperity now have a chance. Godspeed to all the people of Iraq.
That banner is a gorgeous work of art.
I was arguing last night the Americans and their freedom (or at least stability) loving Iraqi allies have won.
I pray I am correct.
Gees I wish I could write pretty like Real. almost makes me want to try spell check. I have to admit that he is also kicking your asses. none the less, I feel that we must examin gulf war one, in which sadam hussien told us several times that he would need to invade kuwait if they didn’t stop side drilling into iraq, and denying access to the shatt al arab. some of us remember that our girl ambassador april glaspie(really your girl, she was born in BC) told sadam very shortly before he invaded kuwait that “We have no opinion on your Arab – Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary (of State James) Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960’s, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America.. as I recall it was james baker who reiterated on several occasions to sadam that we had no defensive treaties with kuwait.
further, “We do not have any defense treaties with Kuwait, and there are no special defense or security commitments to Kuwait. – U.S. State Department Spokesperson Margaret Tutweiler, July 1990
“Historically, the U.S. has taken no position on the border disputes in the area, nor on matters pertaining to internal OPEC deliberations. We have no defense treaty relationship with any gulf country. That is clear . . . we have not historically taken a position on border disputes. — Assistant Secretary of State John Kelly before a House foreign affairs subcommittee on July 31, 1990
After this statement, Representative Lee Hamilton asked Kelly if it would be correct to say that if Iraq invaded Kuwait the United States would not be obligated to commit its military forces in Kuwait’s defense. Kelly replied, “That is correct.”
in the real world, that would be interpreted as giving permission. If the bush admin wasn’t giving permission, then they were extraordinarily incompitent in not telling him the likely result of such an invasion.
days after sadam entered kuwait, a reporter asked Glaspie why she had given sadam permission to invade and she said “Obviously, I didn’t think, and nobody else did, that the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait”
it’s funny how many people actually believe US spy sats and you know…actual spys, wouldn’t notice the massing of troops on the border. conversly, when george hw bush went on TV and told us that sadam was massing troops on the saudi border for further mischief,, the russians actually sold a TV station in south florida weather sat photos showing nothing but empty desert… http://chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/glaspie.html http://www.missionislam.com/nwo/gulfwar.htm
ya know…fraud leading to death, destruction and a lot of pissed off arabs
This is hilarious! Good one. Whoever did this should get a job on SNL. I can’t stop laughing.
Here is an idea…why dont we wait for the people of Iraq to choose when or how they would like to honour the victory.
ET?…………uh…….ET?
Sometimes ET wins, this time…nope.
real – right of centre -manny – Matt – and the rest of the asshats – what is so pityfull is that none of you and I mean NONE of you have any idea as to how pathetically stupid you really are. I will leave you with that thought.
Thanks, different bob, for providing us with a Small Dead Animals Classic:
“what is so pityfull (sic) is that none of you I repeat NONE of you have any idea as to how pathetically stupid you really are”
Beautiful.
ET:
This spring’s election will be, what, the fifth in Iraq?
People risked much to go to the polls and they even got it right by dipping a voter’s finger in purple ink … that would rule out the multiple voting encouraged by ACORN in the US.
In that sense, Iraq seems to have a more effective way of keeping voter fraud down.
It’s a fact the vast majority of the Iraqi people despise the foreign invaders … those would be the al-Qaida types.
No democracy is perfect and no free society is totally free from asshats who use their freedom to spit on the concept of freedom.
But, they’re free to do so here. Wouldn’t get that chance in a marxist, fascist or Islamic republic.
Spout away asshats.
war’s over folks. Victory is ours…never mind 235 Iraqi security forces and civlian deaths this month or the 14 americans who have died thus far in novemeber.
“Mookie Al Sadr’s supporters burning Bush in effigy”
Mookie el sadr is…a Shia as I recall. Most Iraqis are. The ones who are supposed to like bush the most, ya know; for setting them free. Really, I think they are waiting to kill all them sunnis and join up with Iran soon as we get outta there. So I guess we gotta stay forever. Yea! Everything moving along like a well oiled plan ought to.
Yep, there are always people in any democracy who will spit on individual freedom.
Even happens in a fledgling democracy like Iraq.
I see a lot of Acorns falling.
jp- the headline is ‘victory in Iraq day’. That means a victory for the agenda of the war, which was to free the Iraqi people and enable democracy to emerge.
That’s a reality; we are acknowledging that reality. The fact that there are still Al Qaeda around; that there are still intra-Iraq tribal tensions for power; the fact that Iran and Syria are still trying to stir up trouble – that’s another reality. As I said, you can’t overcome the centuries of tribal fighting and the emergence of Islamic fascism in a year or even a few years. But you can destroy the infrastructure that supports them. And that is exactly what has occurred.
Therefore, these ‘other realities’ don’t and can’t deny the first one; that freedom and democracy has emerged in Iraq. That is what so many of us have supported, and are supporting. It’s something to celebrate. Freedom matters.
Renounce this heresy about this
To say that today, November 22, 2008 is Victory in Iraq Day is ridiculous and you all know it. You can’t just pick a date out of thin air and declare “Peace”.
JP:
Just did.
Try and stop it.
JP:
Just declared today as the day of victory, that is.
The only ‘peace’ anybody can create is inner peace.
Nobody can change the world, since evil will always find a way to sucker in enough weak human beings and make them believe the evil they do against other human beings is somehow the will of a higher power. Of course it is, the power of evil is stronger than an undisciplined human being.
The only worthy control is self-control, something that seems foreign to the Islamic extremists.
It’s about time people said “Victory in Iraq” in this modern day, it really doesn’t get much better and it certain is happening faster and better than the UN has been able to do in the Congo. The victory is in two parts, (4 if you want to get picky) first the initial invasion was accomplished in about 3 weeks with minimal loss of life on both sides, partly due to the Iraqi walking away from their posts, mainly because the Iraq army was constantly out fought, out manoeuvred and out thought by the US military. Compare this to the Iran-Iraq war where Iran was unable to make any headway over a period of 10years and with a combined causality rate of approx. 1.2million dead and millions wounded.
The 2nd part was the occupation, which in all fairness the US bungled badly and much of the blame falls on Rummy’s shoulders, had Gates been in charge I suspect things would have been different. In fact Michael Yon warned that Civil War was basically starting and if the US didn’t do something quick the country would be lost. The US Army and Marine Corp to their credit did an about face and reinvented themselves on the spot changing their tactics and creating the surge. The US did have some help, the AQI bungled the insurgency so badly that they basically drained the swamp they were hiding in and stuck out like sore thumbs. While they are still dangerous, they have totally lost the support of the people caused by their intense and barbaric cruelty to the average Iraq both Sunni and Shia. The military also out played Sadar who also bungled his chances and Iran is scrambling to reposition itself with the Shia government currently in power.
There is lots to go wrong and I expect it will, but it is now up to the Iraqis to sort it out, the US did what they could to sort out their problems and the respect for the US military is pretty high amongst the average Iraqi who likely trust them more than their own government. When I ask people opposed to the war, what they would have done in regards to the collapse of the sanctions, the lack of interest in carrying out the UNSC terms and conditions. Russia, China and France’s interest in accessing the oil fields and thereby financing Saddam to rebuild his army, I would say that less than 1% of the people I talked have any sort of a plan based on the reality of the ground.
ET
You can spout your pseudointellectual hogwash all you want. Perhaps adopting the superior tone of “You seem to have no understanding of…” impresses those in your environment. But none of your arguments hold water on examination. They are the rantings of an unhinged partisan desperately trying to justify the unjustifiable. And throwing a lot academic words on top of it all for extra measure.
Has it really come down to phrases like “factual belief” for your kind, ET? If it was a ‘belief’ why was it stated as a certainty by Cheney? What possible reason for that could there be other than that they knew they had a weak case for war that the public wouldn’t accept so they had to embroider and make up stuff to gin up the fear.
Contrary to your belief I’ve watched more than a few Bush speeches over the last 8 years, and in the run-up tothe war I heard a minute amount of time devoted to democracy in Iraq as compared to the “smoking gun becoming the mushroom cloud”, re-iterated like a drum beat by him and Rice. For a factual belief it sure got a lot of airplay – this insinuation that if they didn’t go to war a Hiroshima would take place in America.
Again: what a namby-pamby cowardly word-parsing on your part – ‘factual belief’. It’s an intellectual disgrace, and evidence of the emptiness of your argument.
Your assertion that my objection to the Iraq war is owing to my irratonal animus towards Bush reflects a concerning trend towards delusion on your part. I say delusion because I didn’t once mention Bush in my post, and so for you to make such as assessment goes under your usual tactic of: just making stuff up. But that you do so when the evidence is here for all to see that your claim has no factual basis – well, excuse me for saying, but that’s just kind of…crazy.
I know, I know, you can’t help yourself in your sheer, tired, stale partisan hackery: the idea that anyone who disagreed with the war, or torture, or wiretapping – or anything the Bush adminsistration did – was suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome (how clever!), it worked so well for you all those years!
But now the whole country has BDS, huh, ET? Because he’s the most hated President in history now, ET. Below Nixon in the depths of diagrace of Watergate. Imagine that! That old saw just don’t work anymore, ET.
And it especially doesn’t work when the person you’re arguing against hasn’t even mentioned Bush, much less expressed animus towards him. That only exposes the fact that your arguments are partisan reflexes, not actual fact-based reasonings or refutations, but just slimey, dishonest smears designed to shut down debate. Well, it worked for awhile, didn’t it?
AS for your other smear, it’s difficult to see how your charge that I ‘follow the crowd’ can be true since I opposed the war back in those years when it remained quite popular. You are the one who followed the crowd, but then the crowd got smart – i.e., reponded with reason and logic to observable material reality. – you didn’t. So now you’re stuck with Orwellspeak like “factual belief” and smearing your opponent to distract from the fact that you can’t make your case.
Since the war is over and…we won, why doncha all book a flight on over to get a heapin’ helpin’ of free messopotamia? Perhaps walk from your hotel in the green zone out into now peaceful bagdad where the locals will shower you with love and rose petals…don’t forget to send postcards.
Jp, real, Y’all – go ahead – ask the bad guys in Iraq if they don’t feel that they got their ass kicked a thousand ways to hell. They might just tell you they did. If they say they are winning or they have won this thing – they’re lying.
Kind of reminds me of the bridge keeper in the Holy Grail movie. “Its just a flesh wound. Come back here and I’ll bite your knee cap.”
The war is won – no doubt about that. The challenge is to maintain stability and allow this new democracy to flourish.
JP, real and the rest of the naysayers cannot bring themselves to admit that Bush’s boys and girls have done the job. Their hate for him would never allow them to. Take Slevin’s comment “Iraq continues to be a total disaster.” Ya right, Slevin. I agree with the declaration that on one else is willing to make. NOVEMBER 22, 2008 – VICTORY IN IRAQ!!!.
real – again, you don’t seem to ‘get it’.
A ‘factual belief’ isn’t ‘Orwellian’; it’s a well-known philosophical phrase for a belief or conclusion based on facts. It contrasts with an ‘intuitive belief’ which doesn’t rest on facts but on personal emotion; or a ‘hypothetical belief’ which is a conclusion that rests on an assumed hypothesis. And there are others: moral belief, which is a belief resting on a moral system. Religious belief…etc. The fact that you’ve never heard of the phrase – well, that’s your problem.
Again, the WMD was a conclusion based on facts (and I’m not even going to define the gassing of the Kurds as an action of a WMD, though it was). But, based on their evidence, the US-UK concluded that Saddam’s actions of developing a nuclear weapon were real and not rhetoric. After all, the UN sanctions against him weren’t because he was doing nothing. Or, are you assuming that the UN sanctions were irrelevant?
You haven’t dealt with my arguments, for example, against your statements that democracy can be imposed; that Iraq was ‘invaded for oil’. You haven’t provided any proof of your assertion that Iraq was invaded for oil- and one lifted phrase from Greenspan is hardly evidence.
You haven’t explained how Iraq is a ‘disaster’ in your view; nor have you examined the relation between tribal dictatorships in the ME and the existence of Islamic fascism.
As for ‘smearing your opponent’, my telling you to read up on history and the nature of Islamic fascism is hardly a smear. It’s a criticism of your lack of knowledge of the situation.
“I agree with the declaration that on (sic) one else is willing to make. NOVEMBER 22,2008- VICTORY IN IRAQ!!!”
No-one is willing to make that declaration (except some bloggers) because it’s the blackest of lies. Today is November 23, 2008 and the war/occupation continues.
Al Sadr has always wanted to see himself running Iraq – and has opposed the US in the hope that by doing so, he will be swept to power by his countrymen. He is an opportunist, and willing to kick apart any progress made to date if it serves his ends. The fact that he is Shia is as important as the fact Hitler was raised Catholic; it may speak to what he will do to those from other sects/religions once he gets power but does not make him necessarily the only correct answer to Whither Iraq?
Again, the WMD was a conclusion based on facts ET
Nonsense, it was based on lies and propaganda, as anyone with an IQ above their shoe size knew at the time.
manny, please provide evidence for your, ah, hypothetical belief. Thanks.
It’s a factual belief.
I knew Colin Powell’s little performance at the UN was a charade. So did Scott Ridder. But ET, being incapable of critical thought, blinded as she is by partisan animus, bought that song and dance hook, line and sinker. And only she knows her shoe size for sure.
I mean, my gawd, didn’t you learn anything from that babies being wrested from their incubators swindle from Gulf I??? There are none so blind…
Maybe it was wrong to invade Iraq, but to assert Hussein wasn’t developing of possessed WMD flies in the face of documentary evidence provided by UN inspectors, who not only saw these weapons, but inventorized them. The only question is what happened to them – were they destroyed, or shipped to another state (like Syria)?
If indeed UN inspectors were liars or deluded, why did Hussein continue his obfuscation? Nobody, IMO, has provided a satisfactory answer to that question.
BTW, why would US invade Iraq so China, Russia, Germany and France could secure their access to their oil?
People need to do some research and think a bit before they tell others what is “factual.”
Personally, I was against the invasion. But, there were some benefits, such as the AQ miscalculation that Iraq could be their next base of operations. All their involvement did was seal their fate in Iraq, presenting themselves as a target for US forces, while totally alienating the Iraqi people. That miscalculation also degraded AQ to where they are far less capable, and therefore dangerous, than they were.
I see no evidence whatsoever that the invasion of Iraq made US and West more vulnerable to terrorism. Believing it doesn’t make it so, and we will see in the long run which view holds.
As for victory in Iraq, I’m not sure we’re there yet. But, continued hostilities isn’t evidence either. Democracy is about the majority ruling; if a minority make trouble that doesn’t automatically mean failure, or even lack of victory.
Once US invaded Iraq, it was obligated to take the fight to the other foreign invaders, AQ; otherwise they would have created a far more dangerous situation than allegedly existed before.
Again, IMO, the proper doctrine for Iraq was containement, GWB chose to change to pre-emption. Many think he was wrong to do so, but that cannot logically be seen to negate any possible good coming from the invasion.
manny, again, provide some factual evidence for your conclusion that the issue of WMD in Iraq was ‘all lies and propaganda’. Your reference to Colin Powell doesn’t provide the facts about the UN sanctions for Iraq renewing its WMD program.
You state that you ‘knew’ that Powell’s performance was a ‘charade’. Could you provide us with the facts that led to your knowledge?
As for the ‘babies in incubators’, what does this have to do with WMD? Could you explain? Thanks.
shamrock – nice post with reference to the WMD and the UN, and the rejection of the ‘the war was about oil’ argument. However, I think that the main agenda of the war was to destabilize the tribal infrastructures of the ME, by enabling one state to set itself up as a democracy.
Since I maintain that the cause of Islamic fascism is a population living in a tribal infrastructure, when its population is too large for such a system, and when its transition to an industrial economy negates a tribal infrastructure and requires democracy – then, I think that the US led war, to enable democracy to emerge in the ME, was a correct action, as defined by the ‘just war’ theory.
As for the ‘babies in incubators’, what does this have to do with WMD? Could you explain? Thanks.
It has to do with the willingly credulous being so easily suckered with lies and propaganda. Beyond that, attempting to fill the gaps of your limited knowledge is a exercise in futility.
Or, to put it country simple, et, as a republican deep thinker once put it: Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, won’t get fooled again.
no, manny, that’s not a factual explanation. That’s a red herring tactic where you try to diver the legitimate request for information into a spurious ad hominem charge.
Again, what does the ‘babies in incubators’ have to do with WMD? That’s a legitimate request, for I can’t see any relation between the two.
The UN Sanctions, esp. Resolution 687, focused on WMD. Again, would you provide some facts rather than hyperbolic rants? Thanks.
Manny – “I knew that Colin Powell’s little performance at the UN was a charade.” So Manny, how about sharing what the next hot stock tip is going to be or when and where the next major earthquake will happen. How about some Powerball Numbers oh wise one.
Funny I don’t remember any guy named “Manny” being interviewed on TV spouting this amazing wisdom and knowledge he possessed.
Lets leave history to the historians. Those of us presently living in what will be future history are a little too jaded to be as objective as true historians of the future. Dwight Eisenhower knew this all too well when he directed that a complete photographic record be kept for future generations of the horrors of Hitler’s concentration camps. Today there are those who are revisionists when it comes to events of WW2 but the record is there for all to see just as the record will be there for today’s events.
Just as the record now shows that the Allies had to stay in Europe and in Asia for a transition to normalcy, the record will show that the US and its allies in Iraq had to do the same thing to preserve the new democracy. There is no doubt in clear thinking logical people that this war is won.
I assure you, btw, that nowhere in the record will you see that “Manny knew that Colin Powell’s little performance before the UN was a charade.”
Ah, make that Sisyphean futility.
Or perhaps the mother of all futilities.
manny, it isn’t an argument to simply post irrelevant ad hominem ‘put-downs’. It’s a red herring to state that you won’t provide any facts because you state that I have a ‘limited knowledge’. Heh. Prove it. You are moving into an ‘argumentum ad nauseum’ state.
Again, manny, give us some facts that validate your conclusions. Facts.
“Nonsense, it was based on lies and propaganda, as anyone with an IQ above their shoe size knew at the time. … It’s a factual belief.” – manny.
“Google = Iraq + uranium + Canada” – jwkozak91
ET, it isn’t an argument to regurgitate Bush/Rove talking points and dress it up with your crackpot theories about tribalist Islamofacsism. There fact that there were no WMDs validates my conclusion.
Actually, manny, my theories about tribalism aren’t crackpot; they are a pretty standard analysis of the political organization of a tribe versus a non-tribal societal system.
Since you haven’t done any research in these areas, then, you are making the error of an ‘argumentum ad ignorantum…an argument based on ignorance.
Furthermore, you obviously don’t know the nature of democracy, and how it operates within a population large enough to enable a middle class; that’s an industrial economy. If your population gets as large as an industrial one, and retains its tribal political mode – that’s a dysfunctional society. Basic political and societal theory. Nothing to do with Bush/Rove arguments.
You still haven’t presented an argument for your assertions which seem to rest not in facts but only in your subjective feelings, including the Colin Powell speech which you ‘intuitively’ knew was invalid, including your ‘babies in incubators’.
Now, you are claiming that no WMD were found; that wasn’t the point. Do you know the reasons for the UN sanctions, in particular, Res. 687; it was about WMD and inspections. I wonder why the UN bothered to set up such sanctions and such a resolution? Hmmm? Facts, manny – they are important.
Oh, and I can think on my own, manny. I don’t copy Bush or anyone. I’m aware of the different societal and political structures; I know the nature of fascism; I know the developmental history of Islamic fascism; I know the enormous economic and demographic changes of the ME for the past 100 plus years. I know what happesn to a society when its societal systems become unable to ‘fit’ together.
I wonder if you’ve bothered to obtain a similar knowledge, or do you rely only on your subjective impressions and what you hear on the MSM?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4919.htm
Hey ET
I consider it to be a smear when someone suggests I don’t hold a position in good faith because it’s my considered opinion but because I have an irrational animus towards someone.
As I noted earlier, your smear is also a proven fabrication since there had been no mention in my posts of Bush up to that time, or any evidence of animus towards him.
And so your assertion falls under the category of
“baseless smear”. Or rather – demonstrably baseless smear.
But why would you make such a demonstrably baseless assertion?
Because you know your argument is weak, and so you must harriedly come up with stuff to distract from that fact. The sad thing is you think you’re putting one over on the rest of us.
You really are like a pathetic old punch drunk fighter, deluding yourself that your punches are landing anywhere. Attributing criticism of the war to hatred of Bush when Bush hasn’t even been mentioned! Wow, what an intellecual triumph. Did you ever think you’d fall so far, ET?
Allow me to answer on behalf of Manny: his reference to “babies being thrown from incubators” is about the fabrication of that story used to sell the public on the first Iraq war. He was drawing a parallel between that and the fabrication of the WMD (Irag is going to nuke us) being used to sell the public on the 2nd Iraq war.
You see, the story about the babies, like Cheney’s assertion that “We know for a fact that Saddam has WMD” was a baldfaced lie. A fabrication rather like your assertion that my opinions are a result of my hatred of Bush.
Your attempt to diminish others with your supposed vast knowledge of tribalism et al is handicapped by the fact that most of what you spout are hypotheses. You speak as though your hypotheses have been proven. They have not been.
As for your attempts to impress by dropping in factoids like democracy operating in a population large enough to sustain a middle class – well, that’s nice ET. Thanks for this display of your ‘erudition’. I’m afraid you’re giving the impression of a not very bright person trying to come off as … well, as the archetype of what a not very bright person thinks ‘smart people’ sound like.
Because for all your talk, the war is not over, and American lives haven’t stopped being sacrificed for what remains nothing more than hypothesis on your part. That’s what you’re trying to distract us from with all your lying and your attempts to diminish others.
As well, if we examine your arguments closely we find their real origin: in your kneejerk Obama/Clinton disparagements earlier, and in your bizarre, baseless ‘Bush hater’ accusation we discern the outlines of the partisan hack: far greater than your concern about tribal societies of the ME is your need to defend your ideology above all else. For one who is concerned about democracy in foreign lands, your shameless allegiance to ‘party over country’ reveals a questionable loyalty to democracy in America.
C’mon Manny – still waiting for those Powerball numbers!! ET – you want substance to Manny’s postings and so would I and I assume many others. As Manny states it “there are none so blind…… (we all know the quote). To Manny I would reply – There are none so naked as those who will not dress themselves with ‘FACTS”!!!!
Facts! Manny, Facts!!!!
A belated congratulations to all the American servicemen and women, the servicemen and women of the coalition forces, the members of the Iraqi armed forces and police, and most of all, the Iraqi people themselves for their magnificent achievement in undertaking the long, arduous and dangerous journey of transforming a country ruled by a dictator into a democratic state where freedom and prosperity now have a chance. Godspeed to all the people of Iraq.
That banner is a gorgeous work of art.
I was arguing last night the Americans and their freedom (or at least stability) loving Iraqi allies have won.
I pray I am correct.
Gees I wish I could write pretty like Real. almost makes me want to try spell check. I have to admit that he is also kicking your asses. none the less, I feel that we must examin gulf war one, in which sadam hussien told us several times that he would need to invade kuwait if they didn’t stop side drilling into iraq, and denying access to the shatt al arab. some of us remember that our girl ambassador april glaspie(really your girl, she was born in BC) told sadam very shortly before he invaded kuwait that “We have no opinion on your Arab – Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary (of State James) Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960’s, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America.. as I recall it was james baker who reiterated on several occasions to sadam that we had no defensive treaties with kuwait.
further, “We do not have any defense treaties with Kuwait, and there are no special defense or security commitments to Kuwait. – U.S. State Department Spokesperson Margaret Tutweiler, July 1990
“Historically, the U.S. has taken no position on the border disputes in the area, nor on matters pertaining to internal OPEC deliberations. We have no defense treaty relationship with any gulf country. That is clear . . . we have not historically taken a position on border disputes. — Assistant Secretary of State John Kelly before a House foreign affairs subcommittee on July 31, 1990
After this statement, Representative Lee Hamilton asked Kelly if it would be correct to say that if Iraq invaded Kuwait the United States would not be obligated to commit its military forces in Kuwait’s defense. Kelly replied, “That is correct.”
in the real world, that would be interpreted as giving permission. If the bush admin wasn’t giving permission, then they were extraordinarily incompitent in not telling him the likely result of such an invasion.
days after sadam entered kuwait, a reporter asked Glaspie why she had given sadam permission to invade and she said “Obviously, I didn’t think, and nobody else did, that the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait”
it’s funny how many people actually believe US spy sats and you know…actual spys, wouldn’t notice the massing of troops on the border. conversly, when george hw bush went on TV and told us that sadam was massing troops on the saudi border for further mischief,, the russians actually sold a TV station in south florida weather sat photos showing nothing but empty desert…
http://chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/glaspie.html
http://www.missionislam.com/nwo/gulfwar.htm
ya know…fraud leading to death, destruction and a lot of pissed off arabs
This is hilarious! Good one. Whoever did this should get a job on SNL. I can’t stop laughing.
Here is an idea…why dont we wait for the people of Iraq to choose when or how they would like to honour the victory.
ET?…………uh…….ET?
Sometimes ET wins, this time…nope.
real – right of centre -manny – Matt – and the rest of the asshats – what is so pityfull is that none of you and I mean NONE of you have any idea as to how pathetically stupid you really are. I will leave you with that thought.
Thanks, different bob, for providing us with a Small Dead Animals Classic:
“what is so pityfull (sic) is that none of you I repeat NONE of you have any idea as to how pathetically stupid you really are”
Beautiful.