War in Iraq... justified?

[RusVal]

Newspaper claims Iraqi informant is "glad he lied about WMDs to get the regime removed."

I'm... not sure how I feel about this.  Heck, I can practically hear the cries "sullbit" already.  But if this is true...  I dunno.

[MilitiaJim]

*shrug*  I extended in '04 to go because I support the endeavor.  The shame is that we didn't do this in '91.

[Crafty_Alex]

I was really, really mad about this when I first read the article. Over $1T spent! Over 100k Iraqis dead! A recruiting drive for jihadis! Dogs and cats, living together! Then I realized it would have happened anyway - Curveball's not a con-man who fleeced the world...he's just a dick who gave the right people the excuse they wanted.

From the article, it's noted Curveball was flagged as unreliable by intelligence sources, and the governments involved in the invasion chose to go forward anyway. Personally, I think it makes us look like a**holes, but honestly, I don't know it would have changed the ultimate outcome - those governments were spoiling for a fight with Saddam anyway. It certainly won't change anything now. I'll be over here wiping yet some more egg from our collective face.

[ThunderMonkey]

Of course it was easier to tell the average American that we're in Iraq to "liberate" them from Saddam and create fictional links between him and WMDs and terrorism than to say, "He's not playing ball with us any more." One of the only reasons that Mubarak lasted as long as he did is because he kept playing ball.

The Iraq invasion gave a lot of people a quick and easy way to make a lot of money and try to turn Iraq into a Conservative-economic utopia. However, that came at a cost at providing substandard equipment to our fighting men and women. Not to mention the substandard buildings and structures that were built for our military service men and women and in addition to the people of Iraq.

[glimmerrat]

Y'know, if they'd gone in saying 'we're gonna take down Hussein, and that's our only motive', then i'd back them the whole way (never mind that he should've been removed 15 years earlier).

[MilitiaJim]

Is it worth mentioning that the list of organizations that believed the Baath regime had chemical weapons included the Iraqi Army?

(And I'm with Glimmer on the takedown.)

[ThunderMonkey]

Agreed on Glimmer's point.

[MilitiaJim]

Let us not lose sight of two (craptastic) reasons why Saddam was not taken down in '91:

The asinine theory that stability is better what could develop from the chaos.

The racist notion that Arabs cannot handle democracy.  (My disagreements with democracy aside, it has shown itself to be the least awful method of selecting leaders.)

[Nepenthe]

The racist notion that Arabs cannot handle democracy.  (My disagreements with democracy aside, it has shown itself to be the least awful method of selecting leaders.)

I don't think it's so much racism, as the nascent realisation that whoever is chosen by popular vote can actually be a lot more hostile towards America/the West than a dictator (see Hamas).

[MilitiaJim]

A)  I can live with a country of idiots voting themselves penury, the Gaza strip would be a wasteland of cannibals if they weren't getting foreign aid to pay the murderous masses, and how many left genuinely support Hamas is a different story.
B)  A few bombs on their radio and TV stations open the way for regular broadcasts of Locke, Smith, and Jefferson.
C)  Related to A, cut off the aid, and make sure the people can vote with their feet (leave).

[Krensky]

Ignoring debatable morality and the non-existent legality, I'm firmly convinced we could have achieved the same effects in Iraq with a few well placed rounds of 7.62 (or something more exotic).

I'm not advocating assassinating foreign heads of state, just that I doubt things could have been more chaotic and messy had that happened rather then the whole invasion and occupation.

[ArawnNox]

I was following a political journal in the early years of the war and I read an article that basically said, "How do we know they have WMDs? We have the receipt." A large shipment of DOW chemicals for "medical research" back in the Regan years.

That said, I never believed any of the reasons for going into Iraq. Deposing a dictator who whole-sale slaughters his own people? Sure, fine, but it really should not have dragged out like this.

Nevermind that the whole affair in Afganastan was a complete clusterf*ck of an operation, besides.

There's my piece. Imma bow back out of the discussion. Inflammatory topic is flammable.

[MilitiaJim]

Ignoring debatable morality and the non-existent legality, I'm firmly convinced we could have achieved the same effects in Iraq with a few well placed rounds of 7.62 (or something more exotic).

I'm not advocating assassinating foreign heads of state, just that I doubt things could have been more chaotic and messy had that happened rather then the whole invasion and occupation.

The morality of assassinating Saddam Hussein would not have been in doubt:  Two thumbs up.  Likewise the legality is clear and again affirmative:  Cassius beli existed to declare war, members of government are legitimate targets in war.

Would things have been less messy and bloody had Saddam been assassinated rather than tank rolling the country?  I am inclined to suspect not.  The south would have risen in rebellion again, and absent NATO air power preventing it, been crushed with great bloodshed.  If we had gone that route, the country probably would have broken up, and the Iranians may have invaded.

Less money, more blood, maybe.

Nevermind that the whole affair in Afganastan was a complete clusterf*ck of an operation, besides.

There's my piece. Imma bow back out of the discussion. Inflammatory topic is flammable.

Trying to force 500 years of social progress in Afghanistan was and is a lousy idea.  Lending some air strikes to the folks fighting the Taliban and other Islamists seems like a good idea to me.

Invest in asbestos undershorts.   

[Krensky]

The basic problem is that the Preemptive Strike theory the Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld used to justify invading Iraq also more then justifies The Empire of Japan attacking Pearl Harbor.

[Krensky]

The morality of assassinating Saddam Hussein would not have been in doubt:  Two thumbs up.  Likewise the legality is clear and again affirmative:  Cassius beli existed to declare war, members of government are legitimate targets in war.

I'm not going to involve myself in the moral debate as my position on it is complex and fluid, even to myself.

Legally, with the conditions what they were, assassinating him would have been illegal. The US has a law against assassinating foreign heads of state. I do not know if that extends to war time, but contrary to what a lot of people claim, we are not legally at war. Had we actually declared war on Iraq it might well (and probably would have been) legal.

Would things have been less messy and bloody had Saddam been assassinated rather than tank rolling the country?  I am inclined to suspect not.  The south would have risen in rebellion again, and absent NATO air power preventing it, been crushed with great bloodshed.  If we had gone that route, the country probably would have broken up, and the Iranians may have invaded.

Less money, more blood, maybe.

Probably. My intent was more to point out how half-assed and lazy the planning for what happens after was. Frankly, the best way to have prevented this was to have, you know, listened to TS Lawrence and the other people who knew the area regarding breaking up the Ottoman Empire.

Trying to force 500 years of social progress in Afghanistan was and is a lousy idea.  Lending some air strikes to the folks fighting the Taliban and other Islamists seems like a good idea to me.

Invest in asbestos undershorts.   

The major issue leading to Afganistan was that during the Cold War we fell victim to the lie that the enemy of my enemy is my friend and we supported whatever crazy dictator or terrorist or criminal that showed up at our door sating they were opposed to communism. Typically selling actual democracy down the river in favor of right wing strong men, the more brutal the better.

The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy. Nothing more, nothing less.