Support NeoGAF

[MIMIC]

President Says War Was 'Right'

WASHINGTON — President Bush declared Monday that "knowing what I know today, we still would have gone on into Iraq," signaling that revelations of flaws in the prewar intelligence had not changed his mind about the wisdom of attacking and removing Saddam Hussein from power.

Bush acknowledged that no banned weapons had been found in Iraq, but he said they might still turn up. "We still would have gone to make our country more secure," he said, adding that Hussein "had the capability of making weapons."

[...]

Now, Bush faces a political problem as he revisits the reasons for war, said Stuart Rothenberg, an independent analyst.

"He's caught between a rock and a hard place," Rothenberg said. "An acknowledgment of error would undercut the whole message of strength and toughness and leadership," possibly eroding the president's base of support.

On the other hand, he said, Bush's recent comments about the rationale for war may prompt some to view him as obstinate to the point of being unwilling to admit a mistake.

Los Angeles Times

He cited the "Iraqi threat" as his pretext to invade Iraq. He has just said that even if there was no such threat, he STILL would have gone into Iraq.

I simply cannot believe this. His reasoning is fucked up. A comment like this only strengthens the case about his fiery vendetta against Saddam Hussein. This goes BEYOND the "we made a mistake in assessing the Iraqi threat" excuse. Bush would have attacked Iraq in SPITE of knowing the errors and dubiousness.

 

[Error Macro]

Hey, ridding the world of criminal dictators is a noble cause. I hope that he's able to successfully drop North Korea as well. What's the time? It's time to get Il.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

its because God told him to.

 

[sprsk]

oh.....okay...

 

[Makura]

Hindsight = 20/20.

Saddam should have been taken down a long time ago, WMD's or not.

 

[Goreomedy]

What an evil fucking man.

Vote "other" 2004!

 

[MIMIC]

Hey, ridding the world of criminal dictators is a noble cause. I hope that he's able to successfully drop North Korea as well. What's the time? It's time to get Il.

North Korea is a totally different story. North Korea has repeatedly threatened the United States with its nuclear arsenal. Iraq, on the other hand, has done no such thing...and couldn't do any such thing, seeing as how they didn't have any weapons of mass destruction to begin with.

There's a such thing as International Law. You cannot just one night decide to attack another country simply because you don't like its leadership.

 

[ManDudeChild]

Hindsight = 20/20.

Saddam should have been taken down a long time ago, WMD's or not.

I don't think anyone would disagree with that point, he should have been. But spinning it that way, I could say that the American's should NOT have been all buddy buddy with Saddam in the 80's. The problem here isn't either of those things (as what's done is done, and at this point all that can be done is try to salvage the situation), but that the reasoning for why it happened keeps changing, and the fact no one in the Bush Administration is willing to say they were wrong. Inventing new reasons as to why it needed to be done when one bit of "faulty intelligence" falls through. See if the U.S. had flat out said, "Ok Saddam is a bad guy, lets go help the Iraqi people," I doubt countries would have taken as much issue. Ok places like Russia, France and so forth, that had financial interests would have. More and more, with reports and everything, Iraq is clearly not involved in the "War on Terror", and there are far more important things that should and could have been taken care of first.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Hindsight = 20/20.

Saddam should have been taken down a long time ago, WMD's or not.

so should the 2 dozen other evil dictators that populate this planet, but i don't see Dubya in any hurry to go whoop on their asses.

 

[Error Macro]

You cannot just one night decide to attack another country simply because you don't like its leadership.

Well it's not like we didn't care for the color of paint on the walls of the presidential palaces there. He was heinously torturing and killing people.

 

[Leon]

What? I expected Bush to break down, tear up, and frantically mumble something like "I'm sorry, I'm so sorry, it won't happen again".

 

[MIMIC]

Hindsight = 20/20.

Saddam should have been taken down a long time ago, WMD's or not.

What do you mean "hindsight?" Bush says that if he KNEW WHAT HE KNOWS NOW, he still would have invaded?

 

[ManDudeChild]

so should the 2 dozen other evil dictators that populate this planet, but i don't see Dubya in any hurry to go whoop on their asses.

Exactly. "Free the people of Iraq" is more of a back burner, something to fall back on when questioned ... and it's fallen on often. But even so, it's a double standard with all the other dictators on the planet. Why aren't the people of Sudan being "liberated"?

 

[Makura]

North Korea is a totally different story. North Korea has repeatedly threatened the United States with its nuclear arsenal.

North Korea has been responsive and willing to negoitate. NK is desperate for aid and protection, they have no intention of truly threatening us IMO. And they don't seem to have a history of expousing and supporting the ideals of Islamic terrorists - the ones that have declared a "holy" jihad against us.

 

[Error Macro]

Exactly. "Free the people of Iraq" is more of a back burner, something to fall back on when questioned ... and it's fallen on often.

I really do believe that North Korea and Iran are next. But we can't attack them simultaneously, or give them advanced knowledge of our intentions. North Korea has a 1,000,000 man army, for God's sake. It would take 3/4 our entire armed forces to match that.

 

[MIMIC]

North Korea has been responsive and willing to negoitate. NK is desperate for aid and protection, they have no intention of truly threatening us IMO. And they don't seem to have a history of expousing and supporting the ideals of Islamic terrorists - the ones that have declared a "holy" jihad against us.

Iraq declared a "holy jihad" against the United States?

And BTW, North Korea, in 2003 (or 2002, IIRC), stated that one of their nukes could reach the coast of California.

If that isn't a threat, then I don't know what is.

 

[Makura]

so should the 2 dozen other evil dictators that populate this planet, but i don't see Dubya in any hurry to go whoop on their asses.

- How many of those dictators have invaded other countries?
- How many of those dictators have used chemical weapons on their own people?
- How many of those dictators support and sympathize with Islamic extremism?
- How many of those dictators praised the 9/11 attacks?
- How many of those dictators have violated as many UN resolutions as Saddam did?

 

[Kobun Heat]

- How many of those dictators have invaded other countries?
- How many of those dictators have used chemical weapons on their own people?
- How many of those dictators support and sympathize with Islamic extremism?
- How many of those dictators praised the 9/11 attacks?
- How many of those dictators have violated as many UN resolutions as Saddam did?

SHHH IT DOESNT MATTER BECAUSE WMD WMD WMD BUSH LIAR OIL HALLIBURTON CHENEY!

 

[ManDudeChild]

- How many of those dictators have invaded other countries?
- How many of those dictators have used chemical weapons on their own people?
- How many of those dictators support and sympathize with Islamic extremism?
- How many of those dictators praised the 9/11 attacks?
- How many of those dictators have violated as many UN resolutions as Saddam did?

Are you a joke character?

 

[MIMIC]

- How many of those dictators have invaded other countries?
- How many of those dictators have used chemical weapons on their own people?
- How many of those dictators support and sympathize with Islamic extremism?
- How many of those dictators praised the 9/11 attacks?
- How many of those dictators have violated as many UN resolutions as Saddam did?

So, you're saying that we should have invaded Iraq in 2003 for what we HELPED them do in the 1980s?

 

[Error Macro]

The man listed valid points, how about responding to them instead of questioning his validity as a poster?

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

He cited the "Iraqi threat" as his pretext to invade Iraq. He has just said that even if there was no such threat, he STILL would have gone into Iraq.

He didn't really say there was no threat... just that the "ability to make weapons" is worthy of the same force as actually having the weapons and being prepared to use them.

(Please don't tell anyone I can make a pointy stick.)

 

[Makura]

Oh gosh, here we go with the 80's again. I think youre dodging the issue - our aid to Iraq was because we wanted to contain Iran.

After the regime of the Shah had been overthrown (February 1979) Khomeini went back to Iran and became the leader of the Islamic revolution. In November 1979 Khomeini`s men conquered the US embassy in Theheran. They took 53 US citizens as hostages. The new regime supported active terrorism and spread radical fundamentalistic islamic convictions.

http://uploader.wuerzburg.de/gym-fkg/schule/fachber/englisch/joel/strophe5/ayatolla.html

 

[MIMIC]

Oh gosh, here we go with the 80's again. Stop dodging the issue - our aid to Iraq was because we wanted to contain Iran.

I'm not going to ignore history simply because it isn't convenient for your argument.

 

[Chesapeake Silt]

People are retroactively justifying the war by saying that we saved lives from a dictator. But couldn't we have saved just as many lives, maybe more, with the same cost (and possibly fewer American casualties) by entering Sudan before things got bad? Or by dumping the money we would have spent on war into AIDS programs for the third world, or some other humanitarian project? I just don't think that the war in Iraq makes sense without the WMDs in the equation.

I'd like to see somebody do a 'lives saved vs. cost' sort of study with war in Iraq put up against a bunch of other alternatives. I don't think the war in Iraq would end up being the most effective option.

It's all academic, though. We would never agree to send money or troops to a foreign country without a WMD / terrorism scare, or the promise that we would get somehing in return. America is not interested in 'a finer world'. If we did good in Iraq, it was only an accident.

 

[TheQueen'sOwn]

I say you Americans should elect Donald Rumsfeld... that guy is kickass.

 

[Cauliflower of Love]

Fucking LA Times, can someone PM the article?

 

[MIMIC]

Fucking LA Times, can someone PM the article?

I saw this website in Time Magazine that allows you to get some logins for those kinds of sites:

Here: http://bugmenot.com/

 

[OmniGamer]

He didn't really say there was no threat... just that the "ability to make weapons" is worthy of the same force as actually having the weapons and being prepared to use them.

(Please don't tell anyone I can make a pointy stick.)

 

[ManDudeChild]

Oh gosh, here we go with the 80's again. Stop dodging the issue - our aid to Iraq was because we wanted to contain Iran.

Yes, they were the lesser of two evils in that case, but it doesn't negate that fact. As for your comments above on the quick listings, I take issue with them because it's clear you just spouted it off the top of your head. Saddam was one of the few that publicly praised the 9/11 attacks, but to that end, do you recall when even Osama Bin Laden called Saddam an infedel? Kind of makes you think maybe the guy didn't have anyhting to do with 9/11, even back then when all the close min... rash people assumed it automatically. Just to pull out one of those. I'll grant you that Saddam has probably violated more UN resolutions, but then he's given a lot more attention than some of the dictators we don't hear about. The Americans have been buddies with many dictators over the years. not to call you guys evil (I'm really not, just pointing this out). As for the sympathising, do you really think Saddam's the only one that did? Yes I know that he gave money to suicide bomber families, but financial isnt' the only means of support one can offer. Off the top of my head I can't recall any in recent years as far as invasions go, so i'll give you that. But then, as I said earlier, it's clear you just quickly fired off a few bits without properly going into them.

 

[Cauliflower of Love]

I saw this website in Time Magazine that allows you to get some logins for those kinds of sites:

Here: http://bugmenot.com/

Thank ya kindly.

 

[ConfusingJazz]

- How many of those dictators have invaded other countries?

North Korea did once and still threaten to do so, Iran invaded Iraq in the late 70s (that whole Iran Iraq War thing), every African "republic" near the Congo river.

- How many of those dictators have used chemical weapons on their own people?

North Korea (only ones that actually could manufactor them), and the rest didn't get a sweet deal in the 1980's with the US government.

- How many of those dictators support and sympathize with Islamic extremism?

Iran, Syria, but not really Iraq, seeing as how Osama and Saddam hated each other, and never had a working relationship.

- How many of those dictators praised the 9/11 attacks?

Not many pubicly, but I don't think thats really a reason to invade a country. If you harbor them, yeah, fuck em up, but praising it?

- How many of those dictators have violated as many UN resolutions as Saddam did?

Good point, not an $80 billion dollar and rising point, but good point.

 

[Kon Tiki]

Hey, ridding the world of criminal dictators is a noble cause. I hope that he's able to successfully drop North Korea as well. What's the time? It's time to get Il.

So you are saying he should drop out of the race?

 

[heavy liquid]

Thank you Mr. Bush.. so even though the US death toll is at 912, and the body count of Iraqi civilians is estimated at between 11,000 and 13,000, it was worth it, right?

Even though the US was never threatened or attacked, no WMD's were found, and no links to Al Qaeda were found, it was worth it, right?

 

[Kon Tiki]

Even though the US was never threatened or attacked,

Uhhh...

 

[ConfusingJazz]

Uhhh...

Let me clarify, we were never threatened by attack by Iraq.

 

[ManDudeChild]

Uhhh...

By Iraq.

 

[Kobun Heat]

If we helped Iraq get to the position they are in today, isn't it our responsibility to stop it? Cleaning up your own mess, etc?

 

[ManDudeChild]

If we helped Iraq get to the position they are in today, isn't it our responsibility to stop it? Cleaning up your own mess, etc?

Yes, it was your responsibility for years and you guys never did anything. Then go in with false reasoning, falling back on WMD, THEN after that failed falling back on what should have been the real reason, helping them. But that was never the reason. But this is a circular arguement that will go on forever, I can see that already.

 

[Lathentar]

Thank you Mr. Bush.. so even though the US death toll is at 912, and the body count of Iraqi civilians is estimated at between 11,000 and 13,000, it was worth it, right?

I wonder how many Iraqi's would have died if Saddam were to have stayed in power till his death. Infact, how many people in the world would have died if he were to be in power for another 10 to 20 years.

 

[heavy liquid]

I wonder how many Iraqi's would have died if Saddam were to have stayed in power till his death. Infact, how many people in the world would have died if he were to be in power for another 10 to 20 years.

Oh, I get it. The US went to war in Iraq to stop deaths from happening in the future!

Wasn't the US going to try and get some guy named Bin Laden? What ever happened to him.? Oh well, WE GOT SADDAM!

 

[Greekboy]

so should the 2 dozen other evil dictators that populate this planet, but i don't see Dubya in any hurry to go whoop on their asses.

Exactly. Iraq allows the US an opportunity to push its doctrine and send a message to the Middle East as a whole. Moreover, it also helps it's biggest buddy (Israel) maintain its status and US support. The US also gained other obvious benefits (oil, business and military/geographical) that most of the other "2 dozen" dictators and their countries wouldn't necessarily yield.

In order for the US to barge into a country it must first benefit them and their bitches.

 

[ShadowRed]

Hey, ridding the world of criminal dictators is a noble cause. I hope that he's able to successfully drop North Korea as well. What's the time? It's time to get Il.

What about all those dicators in African doing shit that made Saddam look like a benevolent God? Why not liberate them and rebuild their country? Hell people are getting led in Sudan they were playing a game of Unreal, yet no word from W about them? Yeah ridding the world of dicators is certainly a noble cause if that dicator controls the second largest oil reserves. Crap I said the O word again.

 

[Drexon]

Aaahaha! I'll just say what Letterman said after a Bush joke, "Aah, I'm gonna miss him" <violent laughter broke out>.

 

[Makura]

Yes, ConfusingJazz, but how many dictators have done ALL the things I listed?

 

[Che]

Well it's not like we didn't care for the color of paint on the walls of the presidential palaces there. He was heinously torturing and killing people.

...unlike what Americans do in Iraq now....

 

[brooklyngooner]

Yes, ConfusingJazz, but how many dictators have done ALL the things I listed?

I've laughed privately at a number of your comments and self-serving logic, but this one is a real gem.

 

[Makura]

Oh, I get it. The US went to war in Iraq to stop deaths from happening in the future!

Correct, it's called preemption.

Wasn't the US going to try and get some guy named Bin Laden? What ever happened to him.? Oh well, WE GOT SADDAM!

We still are trying to get Osama, Usama...whatever.

 

[Hitokage]

Yes, ConfusingJazz, but how many dictators have done ALL the things I listed?

And how many of THOSE had their asses handed to them and forced to be confined in their own town.

 

[Che]

Hey, ridding the world of criminal dictators is a noble cause. I hope that he's able to successfully drop North Korea as well. What's the time? It's time to get Il.

Hmmmm.... extremely strange... US has supported or even gave power to evil dictators like -let's say- Suharto who massacred over half a million people (just an example that comes to mind) and many many others in Latin America Asia Africa etc. etc. etc. Noble cause? Get serious my man, it's just money making.