Originally Posted by
Henry V
In case you did not notice, this discussion is not about the 2002 NIE report and I have never said I agree or disagree with it. If you want to substantively discuss the merits of that report, go for it and start a new thread.
Also, just to be clear, you maintain that I would be a hypocrite if I were to substantively agree with one NIE report more than another, right? Do you hold yourself to the same standard for determining hypocrisy? If so, then you too must either agree or disagree with all three of these reports? Which is it?
Which is it, young feller. If'n I must start a new thread to discuss the 2002 NIE report I can't rightfully discuss whether I agree with the three reports on this thread, and if'n I discuss whether I agree or disagree with all three reports then I have violated your order to start a new thread. (sorry, was channeling "Raising Arizona")
You're asking me if I agree with an NIE report that has been proven wrong? And why would I do that? The salient question is why would you hang your hat on the relative gospelness (if that's a word) of NIEs when an eggregiously wrong one is one of the reasons we're in Iraq now? And again, I'll ask you...since you put so much stock in NIEs then surely you have not, or ever will again, make the claim that Bush lied to get us into Iraq, right?
Based on the first statement, I made a generalization that somehow making US citizens safer was part of the WOT being a "success". My bad. Since you now point out that you did not write or apparently intend to make the claim that we are safer because of the war in Iraq, let's move on to the question at hand. As I stated in my last post: As you point out, in your original email you listed many items of what was accomplished in Iraq and then provide a scorecard as proof that we are safer.
I look at the list and your scorecard and suggest that most, if not all of these items were accomplished or could have been accomplished without the war in Iraq. I am sure you disagree. You're correct.
I also would reiterate that Al Qaeda could take most of the points on your list, tweak them, and use them as their own recruiting tool. So what? The Japanese and Germans progagandized our success as we marched our way towards their capitals. Are you saying we shouldn't kill AQ lest they use it as progaganda against us?
You clearly see Iraq as a centerpiece in the WOT. I do not. In my view it was primarily a diversion from the WOT. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. True, Iraq was not responsible for 9/11. But without 9/11 there would have been no Iraq war. Being a dangerous and destabilizing despot who supported terrorism and was known/suspected to have WMDs was a particularly bad business to be in in the aftermath of the most devastating and damaging attack ever to our country.
Finally, you wrote:
In the past eight years there is little or no evidence that the war in Iraq has reaped any Middle East benefits. Which of the following are not beneficial (a distinctly different question than if we could have accomplished these without war; which is totally moot since neither of us has a crystal ball)?:
- Assured ourselves, the Middle East and the world that Saddam Hussein would never again produce and use WMDs or export them to others who would
- Removed a dictator who was destabilizing a region crucial to our national security
- Upheld UN sanctions (I don't particularly care about that, but that seems to be important to folks like you)
- freed 25 million people from a tyrant who would feed his own people to plastic shredders and gas women and children
- established a sustainable democracy in a region sorely in need of a democratic examplar. A stable, free, and democratic Middle East is a crucial US security and economic interest.
- We established a precedent that we will not sit back and wait to be attacked before acting in our self-interests and self-preservation
- We established that we are willing to risk national treasure in the effort to prevent rogue nations from aquiring WMDs
- We scared the bejeebers (and the WMD aspirations) out of Libya
- We spooked Pakistan to the extent that they dropped dime on the grandfather of their nuke program who was suspected of passing on nuke technology to rogue states
- A military presence in Iraq and other areas of the Persian Gulf allows us to pull out of Saudia Arabia; giving us greater latitude to apply more pressure to them to stop funding militant jihadists
- A likely unintended consequence was that Iraq served as a magnet to concentrate jihadists and make it easier to slay them in great numbers. Al Queda's reputation as a top notch terror outfit took a beating in Iraq
I doubt that 20 years from now we will say that the war in Iraq was a pivotal event that resulted in middle east peace. I know you won't ever say that because you've invested so much energy in convincing yourself that Bush was/is wrong. Darn it! It would have been just so much easier to pass judgement now if we'd have just tucked tail and run in 2006 and let Iraq fail just like your side wanted. Sorry 'bout that.
"
j/k
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote