[goMac]

U.S. officials rethink hopes for Iraq democracy - CNN.com

"Nightmarish political realities in Baghdad are prompting American officials to curb their vision for democracy in Iraq. Instead, the officials now say they are willing to settle for a government that functions and can bring security."

So in other words, we are now struggling to at least restore Iraq to what it was before we invaded it, rather than the lofty goal of making it a Democracy. Just great.

[Rumor]

If a Democracy cannot be established in Iraq, does this mean the campaign is a failure?

[BadKosh]

Yep. I guess that Intelligence gathering ability we had before we invaded (a Clinton era remnant) really STUNK! We failed to realize that 1000+ years of fighting and Islam has left them without individual identities.

[Rumor]

Typical right wing zealot.

It was Clinton's fault!

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Yep. I guess that Intelligence gathering ability we had before we invaded (a Clinton era remnant) really STUNK! We failed to realize that 1000+ years of fighting and Islam has left them without individual identities.

What are you talking about? There were Democrats and Republicans alike were saying that before we went it. They were dismissed as America-haters by the Republican zealots, and Bush gave the order anyway.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Typical right wing zealot.

It was Clinton's fault!

They have a hard time living in the now. Everything revolves around Clinton or Jimmy Carter, and Bush shits gold. Haven't you figured this out yet?

[smacintush]

Oh I think I remember hearing LOTS of whining about Reagan during the Bush I and Clinton years. Not to mention that Clinton could do no wrong in the eyes of the true believers.

Lets not make this a partisan thing.

Oh and nowhere does it say that the U.S. have officially "given up" on anything. That's just your additional spin on a pre-spun story.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

Oh and nowhere does it say that the U.S. have officially "given up" on anything. That's just your additional spin on a pre-spun story.

The U.S. commanders in Iraq saying that Democracy is no longer a requirement of the campaign isn't official enough for you?

[BadKosh]

The assumption from the lefties is that events have no causes, and no one was responsible for their actions?

WHY didn't we know what the extremists were planning?

I guess that "WALL" placed to prevent sharing Intelligence between agencies just happened?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

What are you talking about? There were Democrats and Republicans alike were saying that before we went it.

Saying what? That saddam had WMDs and he needed dealt with? I agree there was both sides saying that. Until election time came. Then most all of the left waffled to the anti-Iraq spin in attempt to win the election.

It didn't work. So what did they do? Try a second time!

Originally Posted by smacintush 

Oh and nowhere does it say that the U.S. have officially "given up" on anything. That's just your additional spin on a pre-spun story.

gomac has never been known for honest topics. Why start now? :/

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

T
I guess that "WALL" placed to prevent sharing Intelligence between agencies just happened?

Yeah it just appeared. So did the cuts in military and intelligence spending to "balance the budget"

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

The assumption from the lefties is that events have no causes, and no one was responsible for their actions?

WHY didn't we know what the extremists were planning?

I guess that "WALL" placed to prevent sharing Intelligence between agencies just happened?

During the corssover period from Clinton to Bush, the previous administration had collected intelligence pointing to the possibility of an attack on the US by aircraft which was ignored.

But you can ignore that, since everything is fault of a leftie or Clinton or any other BS reason you can think of.

You partisan shills are so sad it is comical.

[Moderator]

yawn...verdict was in a while ago. no one with any sense still thinks iraq was a good idea. Now lets move past it by holding those who enabled cheney and his hand puppet accountable...dems and repubs. Vote for the sensible honest people who publicly opposed this train wreck in the first place.

Obama and Ron Paul.

[tie]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Saying what? That saddam had WMDs and he needed dealt with? I agree there was both sides saying that. Until election time came. Then most all of the left waffled to the anti-Iraq spin in attempt to win the election.

Certainly some on the left are egregiously guilty of this. But there were also plenty of "lefties" who called Iraq correctly. Go back and browse this old thread (3/5/03), for example.

Originally Posted by tie

Fine. The problem is, Bush has completely messed the whole thing up. When I first thought about the coming war, last summer, I was for it. Overthrowing an evil dictatorship is good karma, and there must be some security reasons.

But now I'm totally opposed. Bush hasn't come up with any security concerns to the US. He's tried to make up some Al Qaeda links (e.g., Bin Laden mentioned Iraq in his last tape!!!!). He's pushed for war far too aggressively -- which I'm sure helped pressure Iraq, but it also turned our allies and the rest of the world against us. He's ignored real security threats: homeland security, North Korea. I don't see any threats from Iraq, I think attacking Iraq will only cause more terrorism, I see an enormous and costly war and reconstruction when the economy is in bad shape and we have record deficits.

My own opinion is that if even I could call it right (and I'm not a trained intelligence analyst, military expert, or national politician), then everybody else should have been able to, as well. Getting Iraq right is a pretty basic litmus test, then. (So I am quite reluctant to support, say, Clinton -- but of course you have to vote for the best candidate among the options.)

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Saying what? That saddam had WMDs and he needed dealt with? I agree there was both sides saying that. Until election time came. Then most all of the left waffled to the anti-Iraq spin in attempt to win the election.

It didn't work. So what did they do? Try a second time!

That, for various reasons usually depending on political orientation, we would never be able to successfully install a democracy in Iraq. No it wasn't the most popular view or the most loudly shouted, but it was there and it was bipartisan. The Democrats who backed it were decried by the Republicans as America-haters, and the Republicans who backed it were decried by the Democrats as racists. But there were people on both sides who, from the very beginning, pointed out that removing Saddam Hussein was going to cause a power vacuum and that the various faction in Iraq who have been fighting each other for centuries and had only been even vaguely quelled by the Hussein's heavy-handed policies would take advantage of that and Iraq would turn into a free-for-all.

When it became clear that this was actually what was happening still no one bothered to listen to those who had predicted, still dismissing them as America-haters or racists for daring to imply that either Muslims were incapable of peace or democracy or that the Glorious Leader could possibly fail at anything.

Now it's become a bit of a foregone conclusion and still no one will own up to the fact that they were wrong.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

During the corssover period from Clinton to Bush, the previous administration had collected intelligence pointing to the possibility of an attack on the US by aircraft which was ignored.

Ignored? The report was very vague. It didn't give much information.If Bush started having a "group" patrol and look for people in airports before 9/11 What do you think his nay-sayers would have said?

But you can ignore that, since everything is fault of a leftie or Clinton or any other BS reason you can think of.

You partisan shills are so sad it is comical.

I don't think I have heard ONE person say EVERYTHING was the fault of these people you named. Most claim fault of the people who attacked us. The people that helped fund and plan the attack. The people who support said attackers. THAT is who I blame.

Now someone could say "Maybe if our intelligence gathering wasn't emasculated we could have found out more info" And that is a valid complaint. Or "Maybe if intelligence and military spending wasn't cut in half to "balance the budget" at a time when we need to be spending more money on such things, things might have turned out differently.

All those things are valid beliefs. Back by valid happenstance.

Is that blaming Clinton or the "lefties" on 9/11? Not at all.

The ironic part of this post was, you started your post with accusations in the same tone you complain about others doing in the end of your post.

It's not that you don't like shills. You just don't like shills that aren't shilling your side of it.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Moderator 

yawn...verdict was in a while ago. no one with any sense still thinks iraq was a good idea.

Only really someone that was insecure with his belief would make such an asinine statement.
1234% of verdicts are correctly wrong. Been well known for awhile. Catch up.

Obama and Ron Paul.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

That, for various reasons usually depending on political orientation, we would never be able to successfully install a democracy in Iraq. No it wasn't the most popular view or the most loudly shouted, but it was there and it was bipartisan. The Democrats who backed it were decried by the Republicans as America-haters, and the Republicans who backed it were decried by the Democrats as racists. But there were people on both sides who, from the very beginning, pointed out that removing Saddam Hussein was going to cause a power vacuum and that the various faction in Iraq who have been fighting each other for centuries and had only been even vaguely quelled by the Hussein's heavy-handed policies would take advantage of that and Iraq would turn into a free-for-all.

When it became clear that this was actually what was happening still no one bothered to listen to those who had predicted, still dismissing them as America-haters or racists for daring to imply that either Muslims were incapable of peace or democracy or that the Glorious Leader could possibly fail at anything.

Now it's become a bit of a foregone conclusion and still no one will own up to the fact that they were wrong.

It's mostly not the Iraqi citizens that are doing this. You realize this right? While there are fractions that are, these "fighters" come from all over that area that aren't even citizens.

I think the people who came to show up against their own lives to vote in a Democratic election shows the will and want of the actual PEOPLE that make up Iraq.

Not those groups that are infiltrated in Iraq that want something entirely different. Something entirely more sinister.

[BadKosh]

Interesting that BOTH Iraq and the US have a violent group of illegal aliens, coming from next door who are there to cause trouble and be violent.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Interesting that BOTH Iraq and the US have a violent group of illegal aliens, coming from next door who are there to cause trouble and be violent.

The US has a violent group of illegal aliens?

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Ignored? The report was very vague. It didn't give much information.If Bush started having a "group" patrol and look for people in airports before 9/11 What do you think his nay-sayers would have said?

Security could have been silently stepped up a notch.

We already had metal detectors and x-ray machines, how did they get box cutters on a plane?

A vague report is better than nothing at all.

Originally Posted by Kevin 

I don't think I have heard ONE person say EVERYTHING was the fault of these people you named. Most claim fault of the people who attacked us. The people that helped fund and plan the attack. The people who support said attackers. THAT is who I blame.

Now someone could say "Maybe if our intelligence gathering wasn't emasculated we could have found out more info" And that is a valid complaint. Or "Maybe if intelligence and military spending wasn't cut in half to "balance the budget" at a time when we need to be spending more money on such things, things might have turned out differently.

All those things are valid beliefs. Back by valid happenstance.

Is that blaming Clinton or the "lefties" on 9/11? Not at all.

The ironic part of this post was, you started your post with accusations in the same tone you complain about others doing in the end of your post.

It's not that you don't like shills. You just don't like shills that aren't shilling your side of it.

It is common for the right to blame the left and vice versa.

Being that I am neither left nor right, I am far from a shill.

Keep your partisan politics and continue to watch this country fold in on itself.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Security could have been silently stepped up a notch.

We already had metal detectors and x-ray machines, how did they get box cutters on a plane?

A vague report is better than nothing at all.

Something was going to happen somewhere soon. DO SOMETHING!

It is common for the right to blame the left and vice versa.

Being that I am neither left nor right, I am far from a shill.

Keep your partisan politics and continue to watch this country fold in on itself.

Are bias comes through at times when we are trying to hide it most.

[peeb]

What does your sig mean?

[idjeff]

Originally Posted by goMac 

The U.S. commanders in Iraq saying that Democracy is no longer a requirement of the campaign isn't official enough for you?

By US commanders, are you saying US military commanders? Since when do military commanders dictate US policy?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Security could have been silently stepped up a notch.

Security for what?

We already had metal detectors and x-ray machines, how did they get box cutters on a plane?

If before 9/11 we started being that anal, you anti-bushies would have screamed BIG BROTHER and OMG he just had a box cutter!11

A vague report is better than nothing at all.

Not when that vague report does nothing to help them.

It is common for the right to blame the left and vice versa.

Being that I am neither left nor right, I am far from a shill.

Well then you are just acting like one.

Keep your partisan politics and continue to watch this country fold in on itself.

I am not the one spewing partisan politics. I'm just representing the facts. Not the spin you portrayed it as. You made it look as if the left handed the right the exact plans as to what happened and Bush did nothing.

Again, the 9/11 commission disagrees with you. They say you are wrong.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by idjeff 

By US commanders, are you saying US military commanders? Since when do military commanders dictate US policy?

gomac's topics aren't known not to fit the truth that often. I don't know if he does it on purpose, or if he just skims the articles, or if he is just clueless.

[Buckaroo]

I read part of the story, and for some reason, I kept thinking, this sounds like garbage. Who are they saying is saying all of this (names not just titles)? It almost reads like something that came out of Michael Moores mouth, a bunch of BS.

[subego]

Originally Posted by peeb 

What does your sig mean?

Seems pretty obvious.

I'm more interested in where he got it. I long for the days when countries were hot chicks.

[edit: any reason you chose to necro this thread to ask that question?]