Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: The Retrospective War

  1. #1
    The US invades Iraq, terminates Hussein and after a 6 month stay to allow the construction of a new democratic regime quietly leaves Iraq.

    During this time they allow the UN to inspect Iraq for weapons of mass destruction. The inspectors find unequivical physical evidence (not papers describing their construction). Chemical weapons are also discovered (like the mustard gas and cyanide found in the Euphrates river yesterday).

    In addition, links to share these weapons with terrorist groups are found.

    Bush says: "I told you they had them, I told you they were an international threat, I took care of the problem.

    Let us forget those people who will never beleive. We show them a nuclear reactor covered in anthrax, they call it a "Hollywood production".

    And those on the other side, who will take a goat in the field with the words "nuclear bomb" (in English) spray painted on its flank as more than enough hard evidence. Yep, I done seen a movie on this! Export an enitre flock of nuclear goats to the US, then once they start to grazing, Ka-Bloohey!

    This post is for those willing to accumulate evidence and alter their thinking.

    1) Saddam is evil
    2) We want to liberate the fine people of Iraq
    3) We will feed those who have been starved by their own.
    4) We love babies and puppy dogs.

    The above are political justifications, propaganda. I ignore this BS, it insults my intelligence.

    If my scenario plays out, what now is your take on the war? This is the trust I am putting in my Government at the moment. This is what I require. I totally understand the doubts expressed by those in this forum, but I don't think you will be able to judge this affair until all the cards have been turned over.

    If accomplished I think the US will really bolster its credibility and it will leave a postive impression on the Middle East, especially the people of Iraq. If this does not happen, what a disaster for America in all ways.

    The war, once started, must be seen to it's conclusion.
    Aren't we in the trust tree, thingey?

  2. The Drawing Room   -   #2
    Skillian's Avatar T H F C f a n BT Rep: +1
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    The war, once started, must be seen to it's conclusion.
    The problem I think is that the "conclusion" in the distance is so vague. It may be easy to pinpoint the end of the war in Iraq but if this is going to be seen through to it's conclusion it could be going for years, even decades. Of course it depends on what you accept the purpose of this war to be. If it's WMD there are many other "rogue" countries that have them too. If it's the liberation of Iraq or the imposition of democracy then there are many other countries this could be done in too. If this is part of the war on terrorism then of course it still will not be over.

    As to how perspectives of the war will be changed if there is unequivocal evidence of weapons of mass destruction, like you imply it will depend on the person - there are many who feel war shouldn't occur even if there was proof. Personally I think that while it will of course help the image of the US, many , including myself, will still think the US/Coalition went about it the wrong way. The impression I got was that war was what the US was pushing for the minute they mentioned Iraq. They were convinced to proceed through the United Nations, but they did so grudgingly and I felt that the UN and other Nations were only dragging behind the US trying to slow them down in their push for war. Everyone knew war would happen regardless of whether any WMD were found because the US would not listen to anyone else.

    A bit of a rambling post I'll admit, but my basic point is that even if WMD are found and all accusations found to be correct, many people will still feel that the US went about this the wrong way, and any "i told you so"s will not help the US completely regain the respect they have lost from many nations.

  3. The Drawing Room   -   #3
    Did you read the entire post? C'mon be honest! I think you skimmed it.

    The purpose of the war is to discover and destroy WMD which are perceived as a threat to the USA and the removal of the regime which would only rebuild this stuff after we left.

    All that other stuff is just BS as I pointed out.

    So, let's just say that George knows that they are there. He knows it unequivically. The UN does only slow him down, but he agrees for political reasons. Hans Blix loves the limelight and would love to go on inspecting Iraq forever while the world hangs on his every report. He really enjoyed hyping his reports, then backing away from anything definite when he actually delivered them. UN inspections were a dog and pony show. Period end.

    In addition, it turns out that certain countries will oppose war no matter what. The UN is not about right or wrong, but about hidden agendas.

    So, screw the UN, time to take care of business, because you know the weapons are there, and you know that 12 years of UN inspections have done nothing.

    Ok, so what is your solution.

    People here talk so highly about "diplomatic means". What the hell does diplomacy mean to Hussein. Diplomacy is the antithesis of his reign of terror.

    George is smart enough to know that impotent inspectors, hidden UN agendas, and grandiose diplomacy are a wasted on a man like Hussein. You have to deal with him on terms he can understand.


    This response is based on assumptions presented in the first post, so read it before you address it in isolation.
    Aren't we in the trust tree, thingey?

  4. The Drawing Room   -   #4
    Rat Faced's Avatar Broken
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    IF WMD are found, and none have been so far (although there are some now being tested) then you have 'the smoking gun'.

    This will of course give the USA an opportunity to regain a large measure of world respect.

    I say 'an opportunity', because it totally depends on 'what happens next'.

    If the USA hand over the re-building of Iraq to the UN, they may even gain some respect in the Middle East (The place that they most NEED some), as well as regain a lot of the respect they had throughout the Western Hemisphere.

    If on the other hand, and this seems to be the most likely at the moment, the USA stays in charge of the 'rebuilding' of the country, then the opposite will happen.

    It will reinforce the belief in the Middle East that the US has become expansionist and imperial in nature, and the respect that has already been badly shaken in the Western Hemisphere will plummet to a new low.

    In other words, the ball is completely in Dubya's court.

    The other trouble is that none of these weapons were found in the places that 'it was known that they were', and if any are found at this late stage then a lot of people will shout that they were a Political Necessity of Bush/Blaire.

    Those on the fence about them being planted will point out that they were not used, even though the country was being invaded, so what evidence is there that Hussain would have attacked USA with them?

    I think Hobbes, that you need to take yourself out of your own culture, and try and put yourself in the shoes of a number of cultures that now despise the US, and it will take a lot to show them they are mistaken.

    As my mother always said "Theres nowt stranger than folk"

    An It Harm None, Do What You Will

  5. The Drawing Room   -   #5
    j2k4's Avatar en(un)lightened
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Oh, please...

    You post incisively, as always.

    I fear, however, that while you intuit an agreeable ending to the war, and it's inherent function as rehabilitative of the U.S.'s reputation, there remains an irrational "cult" of anti-U.S. sentiment that no amount of goodwill, benevolence, or logic, can penetrate.

    I have NO doubt this will end as you have outlined.

    Some (an irritatingly large number) have a pathological aversion to evidence; they prefer "propaganda" they can find with "links".


    Did you mean the "level of respect" the U.S. enjoyed under Clinton?
    I could do without that. Actually, when did we ever enjoy any respect internationally?

    Where (Oh please, please, tell me) did you-or anybody else-get the idea that the U.S. was expansionist? Good Lord, we ran Saddam OUT of Kuwait-We made the Russians tear down the Berlin Wall-Don't you think someone would have noticed our "expansionist" tendencies by now?
    Just what, exactly, did we do to make you think that way?
    “Think about how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of 'em are stupider than that.” -George Carlin

  6. The Drawing Room   -   #6
    Barbarossa's Avatar mostly harmless
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Over here!
    Originally posted by j2k4@8 April 2003 - 04:23
    -We made the Russians tear down the Berlin Wall-
    You what???

    You'll be taking credit for our long hot summers next!

  7. The Drawing Room   -   #7
    j2k4's Avatar en(un)lightened
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Oh, please...
    Originally posted by barbarossa+8 April 2003 - 03:47--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (barbarossa @ 8 April 2003 - 03:47)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--j2k4@8 April 2003 - 04:23
    -We made the Russians tear down the Berlin Wall-
    You what???

    You'll be taking credit for our long hot summers next! [/b][/quote]
    Of course-Global Warming!
    Invented by Al Gore in 1976.
    Last edited by Barbarossa; 04-02-2007 at 03:53 PM.
    “Think about how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of 'em are stupider than that.” -George Carlin


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts