Even with Saddam captured, the decision to go to war was wrong.

Zynx

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 03:41 PM
Original message

Even with Saddam captured, the decision to go to war was wrong.

I always expected that we would get Saddam, but it wasn't important to me. He's a bad guy and we're better off rid of him, but the fact remains that going to war with Iraq was a bad move.

For one, we have lost hundreds of soldiers killed and thousands wounded for life.

Another cost has been monetary with not only this $87 billion spent, but previous and future costs that need to be taken into account.

In addition, Iraq has become a magnet for terrorists and terrorist recruiting and will remain so without Saddam.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Randi_Listener

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 03:42 PM
Response to Original message

1. WMDs?

Let me know when they find the "real" reason for attacking an unarmed nation.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Zynx

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #1

2. Forgot about that.

I was just talking about whether or not it was worth it. I have come to the conclusion that it wasn't.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

wuushew

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 03:45 PM
Response to Original message

3. People should not be happy about this

Edited on Sun Dec-14-03 03:45 PM by wuushew

You cannot isolate this incident from the greater political realities. This spectacle will be used further advance PNACism, unilaterialism and promote an absolutist western view of morality on the world. The capture of this one man will also give Bush and increased popularity rating imperiling the democrats in 2004 and their ability stopping the further damage shrubco has planned domestically. For all those celebrating ask yourselves what was the cost?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Zynx

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #3

4. A short term boost that will fade rapidly.

It won't even be much of a boost. Do you remember a certain major event that happened during his father's administration know as the fall of the Soviet Union in December of 1991? That didn't get him re-elected now did it?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

corporatewhore

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 03:49 PM
Response to Original message

5. my thoughts

my thoughts:those of us who are antiwar aneed tp stay on message.we still protested while the war was popular.becuase it was wrong. we made it throughthe first bombings and the "end" of the war with statue pulling and all.
The occupation is still illegal.It is still wrong
The troops need too be brought home now since saddam is captured.
the media whores will treat prince georgie as His Holy Emperor George Freedom loving Bush for awhile. and will make it out as if he personally lassoed saddam himself for a couple weeks but we need to stay on message
One dictator down one to go

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Blade

(624 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 03:51 PM
Response to Original message

6. I totally agree, my friend...

The main objective to attack Iraq in the first place was to get the so-called "Weapons of Mass Destruction." We never found them. The second objective was that Iraq supposedly was an "imminent threat" to the US. What threat were they? The only threat I saw was that Saddam would burn his oil supplies so Dubya couldn't get any of it.

The war in Iraq was indeed a bad move. But are the media whores and the sheeple of the US going to agree with us? Hell no. They'll see all over the news for the next 9483750934875983475 years that Dubya led a war that ultimately led to the capture of Saddam Hussein, because Saddam Hussein was a bad man.

Yes, Saddam Hussein was a bad man, but we have to remember this:
The ends don't justify the means.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Demobrat

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 03:58 PM
Response to Original message

7. Of course it was wrong.

Nobody ever denied Saddam existed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Wed May 01st 2024, 03:49 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.