PDA

View Full Version : Was war worth it?



AlmostThere
02-14-2010, 05:07 PM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/35393859#35393859

David Gregory gives Biden a softball question so he can explain his claim that Iraq will be a huge accomplishment for this administration. And then at about 55 seconds he asks Biden if the war was worth it. Considering that there have been thousands killed and injured fighting this war, you'd think Biden would tell the families of the soldiers who died or were injured fighting this war that their sacrifice wasn't in vain. You would think that, wouldn't you? :mad:

djones520
02-14-2010, 05:13 PM
I can't watch video's here, so I'm going to assume his answer was no?

AlmostThere
02-14-2010, 05:33 PM
Right, you are. It was more important for him to take a shot at Bush than to tell the thousands who've sacrificed so much that their sacrifice was worth it. :mad:

How do these people sleep at night? Or is it that this guy is the dumbest SOB who has ever set foot near the Oval Office?

wilbur
02-15-2010, 09:15 AM
Some of you may think this is true of Iraq, others might not - but think about a war that really is unjustified, unproductive, poorly managed, ill-conceived, and just all around not the right thing to have done - and needless to say, it came at the cost of the lives of many soldiers.

Is it a patriotic duty in such an instance to simply pretend that everything is peachy, to spare the troops some emotional distress? Because, think for a second - it also spares the parties responsible for the mess of their burdens of responsibility and culpability. If one doesn't call attention to such things, it seems that would ensure a mistake is prolonged, and even worse - gets made again and again.

NJCardFan
02-15-2010, 10:38 AM
Some of you may think this is true of Iraq, others might not - but think about a war that really is unjustified, unproductive, poorly managed, ill-conceived, and just all around not the right thing to have done - and needless to say, it came at the cost of the lives of many soldiers.

Is it a patriotic duty in such an instance to simply pretend that everything is peachy, to spare the troops some emotional distress? Because, think for a second - it also spares the parties responsible for the mess of their burdens of responsibility and culpability. If one doesn't call attention to such things, it seems that would ensure a mistake is prolonged, and even worse - gets made again and again.

You're an idiot plain and simple. For starters, the war is long since over. Why people like you don't understand this is beyond me. Hussein and his band of merry idiots are either locked up or dead. We removed a bloody tyrant from power. A tyrant who would put political dissenters into tire shredders. (Funny how libs like you want us to go into Darfur for humanitarian reasons but Iraq is a pariah) The problem is the insurgency and that is a problem because people like you won't let our military take the gloves off and rid the region of these scumbags. As for the lost lives of American soldiers, casualties are a product of war. People die. Tens of thousands died during WWII and countless others were wounded both physically and psychologically yet because that war was fought under a Democratic administration, you libs romanticize it. Be that as it may, Roosevelt and Truman allowed the military to fight the way a war ought to be fought even to the point of dropping nukes in Japan which saved lives in the long run. But then people like you changed the rules of engagement. This is why these 2 conflicts are taking so frigging long.

wilbur
02-15-2010, 10:46 AM
You're an idiot plain and simple. For starters, the war is long since over. Why people like you don't understand this is beyond me. Hussein and his band of merry idiots are either locked up or dead. We removed a bloody tyrant from power. A tyrant who would put political dissenters into tire shredders. (Funny how libs like you want us to go into Darfur for humanitarian reasons but Iraq is a pariah) The problem is the insurgency and that is a problem because people like you won't let our military take the gloves off and rid the region of these scumbags. As for the lost lives of American soldiers, casualties are a product of war. People die. Tens of thousands died during WWII and countless others were wounded both physically and psychologically yet because that war was fought under a Democratic administration, you libs romanticize it. Be that as it may, Roosevelt and Truman allowed the military to fight the way a war ought to be fought even to the point of dropping nukes in Japan which saved lives in the long run. But then people like you changed the rules of engagement. This is why these 2 conflicts are taking so frigging long.

It was a hypothetical - I did not express any opinion of the Iraq war or any other, so why you felt this frothing tirade is somehow on point with what I wrote is beyond me. Re-read the post and try again.

NJCardFan
02-15-2010, 12:45 PM
It was a hypothetical - I did not express any opinion of the Iraq war or any other, so why you felt this frothing tirade is somehow on point with what I wrote is beyond me. Re-read the post and try again.


but think about a war that really is unjustified, unproductive, poorly managed, ill-conceived, and just all around not the right thing to have done

Sounds like an opinion to me. Or am I misunderstanding this statement. Because there are a lot of opinionated content in that statement alone. In it you, not me, not the man in the moon, but you make the statement that the Iraq war is " unjustified, unproductive, poorly managed, ill-conceived, and just all around not the right thing to have done". That's plain English typed out by you. So, perhaps you should re-read your post before telling me to do the same.

AlmostThere
02-15-2010, 01:00 PM
Wilbur,
I can give you about 15 quotes from the Democratic party elite, date and specifically who it was that said it, stating that Saddam had WMD, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons and on-going programs to develop them. These are quotes dating from 1998 - 2002.
Just a few:


"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002Kennedy says we have known for many years? I would guess that's years before anyone had even heard of Bush Jr.


"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002So this is a process that began before Bush was even a state governor?

Probably the most damning:

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002Why is it that when someone wants to blast Bush on Iraq they conveniently forget that the Democratic leadership in Congress as well as President Clinton believed he had WMD and an on-going development program and that the U.N. had been trying for 12 years, issuing 17 resolutions, for him to disarm and surrender his weapons. It sounds like the rest of the world believed he had WMD, long before anyone had heard of Bush Jr.

Within a couple years of the war starting, all the Democrats in Congress act like they and the U.N. never heard of Saddam before Bush invaded Iraq. Kind of gutless, don't you think?

wilbur
02-15-2010, 01:06 PM
Sounds like an opinion to me. Or am I misunderstanding this statement. Because there are a lot of opinionated content in that statement alone. In it you, not me, not the man in the moon, but you make the statement that the Iraq war is " unjustified, unproductive, poorly managed, ill-conceived, and just all around not the right thing to have done". That's plain English typed out by you. So, perhaps you should re-read your post before telling me to do the same.

I was simply asking the question, what if there were a war that was all those things - I was not trying to imply that the Iraq war was or was not an example of such a war. Hope that clears it up.

zBoots
02-15-2010, 01:09 PM
The war was worth it. Its the trying to polish a turd in Iraq that Ive always opposed and which has always been by far the most costly. Keep it up in Afghanistan and we should have went into Iran rigth after Iraq. Allowing iran to become a nuke power is unthinkable.