ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Was Iraq War Worth It

The USA is leaving Iraq in a few months. Was it all worth it?

Join Our Christian Penpals and Take The War Bible Quiz
 ---mike on 10/26/11
     Helpful Blog Vote (3)

Post a New Blog



Thou shall not kill is widely interpreted to be thou shall not murder.
NurseRobert 10/31/11
I totally disagree. That interpretation is not consistent with Jesus words.
Mat 5:21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill, and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
Mat 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
---Rocky on 10/31/11


--Jed 10/31/11
1. I'm still waiting for the questions.
You know we are talking about questions that were already posted, some many days ago.
2. Some of us actually work at jobs and have families and have better things to do that be monitor the internet 24/7
MORE DISTORTION. Many were asked quite awhile ago and you have taken time to read and post many arguments and other statements since then. You just chose not to answer the questions. You are still being evasive because the answers would prove you wrong again. You just can't be honest.
---Rocky on 10/31/11


If thou shall not kill is a commandment from God, then can God break his own commandment and have the Israelites wipe out entire groups of people.

And how else can the right justify executing people?

Seriously, I have to agree with Jed on this on. Thou shall not kill is widely interpreted to be thou shall not murder.
---NurseRobert on 10/31/11


Sad to see some here attack conservative leaders in spite of the greater evil, deceit and hypocrisy of the liberals/Left some bloggers here support.

As Christians neither side of politics should be closely aligned with as our government is God.
Man's government, regardless of which side, is flawed.

Also Rocky, at the final judgement it is ONLY having Christ in you that determines the outcome.
---Haz27 on 10/31/11


WHERE ARE THE ANSWERS TO THE OTHER QUESTIONS? YOU HAVE HAD ALL WEEKEND TO ANSWER.
---Rocky on 10/31/11

1. I'm still waiting for the questions.

2. Some of us actually work at jobs and have families and have better things to do that be monitor the internet 24/7 looking for an argument.
---Jed on 10/31/11




Jed, the reason why many believed he had WMD is because Bush said they did. He was either "misinformed" or he outright lied.
---NurseRobert on 10/31/11

NurseRobert, where did you hear that from? They know more than the Senate Intelligence Committe who unanimously said that Bush did not fabricate, distort, or coerce the CIA into producing false information?
---Jed on 10/31/11


I hope that I am not in attendance at the Judgment seat when all these conservative "Christian" Republicans come for final judgment, and God asks each why they did not do more to help their fellow man. And they proclaim their philosophy of greed that it was their money (forgetting that God is the source of ALL wealth) to spend as they wanted. And God responds, "But I told you in many diverse ways to use your wealth to help one another, not in self-indulgent living. Not only did you not personally help, but you repeatedly and actively worked diligently to dismantle government programs to help". It's sad that these supposed Christians just don't get His message.
---Rocky on 10/31/11


---Jed 10/27/11 (1/4)
Rocky, first you need to get the commandment right. It's referring to murder, not killing of any kind.
--Rocky 10/27/11
I believe what the Bible says, thou shalt not kill. Why do you say the Bible is not translated correctly and it really means "murder"?
I suppose there MIGHT be some times that killing is justified, but not when you start a WAR like Bush did, knowing there would be MASS KILLINGS.

It was DOUBLY wrong since he lied to and whipped the country up into a giant mob.
It's a simple question. Can you again not support what you write? Please respond.
I wonder if the "Bible is inerrant" crowd will back me on this.
---Rocky on 10/31/11


during the run up to the war, many says that there are no WMDs, and FOX news channel & GOP calls those who disagree with them liberals, unpatriotic. now trillions have been wasted & no wmds were found. those who were eager to go to war are giving the round around to justify the war
---mike on 10/31/11


Bushs original reason for the war was Husseins WMD program. In Sept. 2002, CIA director George Tenet (then CIA director) told Bush Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction,. Bush choose to ignore it. In Aug 2006, Bush admitted there were no weapons of mass destructions in Iraq and that Iraq had no ties with Al Qaida.. Then he changed tracks and said the reason we got into Iraq was to get rid of Hussein.

Jed, the reason why many believed he had WMD is because Bush said they did. He was either "misinformed" or he outright lied.
---NurseRobert on 10/31/11




--Jed 10/31/11
Rocky, I did not realize you knew more about Iraq than the CIA and military experts.
ANOTHER LIE. Implies that I said that when I did not. AGAIN I ASK YOU TO STOP PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH AND ATTACKING YOUR LIES. Thou shalt not bear false witness. However I and others obviously were very right and the CIA very wrong when I and others questioned their lies.
And there may have been
VERY FEW believe that. MOST agree with the finding I reported, that Iraq had gotten rid of them years before.
AND STILL NO ANSWERS FROM YOU TO ALL THE OTHER QUESTIONS I ASKED EARLER.
---Rocky on 10/31/11


If I knew all I had to do was listen to Brian Williams and the rest of the liberal news... Wow, all this time I thought the CIA and the president knew more than NBC.
Jed 10/31/11
Wow. Where did this sarcastic attack come from? No one suggested anything like that on this thread. Unbelievable. You are proven wrong on other statements so you make up and pretend as if someone said something stupid so you can attack it and be right. Pathetic.
WHERE ARE THE ANSWERS TO THE OTHER QUESTIONS? YOU HAVE HAD ALL WEEKEND TO ANSWER.
---Rocky on 10/31/11


Jed, Rocky, Others:

The debate on this blog has been interesting reading!

I think that it would help if you realize that Iraq was the location of the Garden of Eden. With the life-giving Euphrates river. All of it supplied by GOD.

SIN entered with Adam and Eve's eating the forbidden fruit. They were evicted for disobeying GOD. Then came Ishamael, whom the Angel told Hagar would be a "Wild Man". Ishmael's descendants continue to rule the wild, violent Middle East. Sound like Iraq?

I believe that the Iraq war involved the USA trying to resolve that country's problems via Physical, Military force. Didn't Work. Why?

Because only GOD can resolve the Spiritual bondage that Iraq is struggling with.
---Sag on 10/31/11


And it's just as accurate to say MANY concluded there was not enough information to make that finding. -Rocky 10/28/11

Yes, many disagreed with Bush, not most. Most thought that Hussein did have WMD. And there may have been. You insist there otherwise. Rocky, I did not realize you knew more about Iraq than the CIA and military experts. If I knew all I had to do was listen to Brian Williams and the rest of the liberal news to be a military expert I could have done that years ago! Wow, all this time I thought the CIA and the president knew more than NBC.
---Jed on 10/31/11


Jed 10/28/11 (2/2)
Isn't that a more logical conclusion than saying that the CIA, the president, and other intelligence agencies around the world didn't know what they were talking about?
You again distort and give the impression that all the intelligence agencies around the world agreed with Bush. That is a lie and another gross distortion. Some experts within the CIA and at other intelligence agencies didn't agree. It is obvious from the outcome that Bush and those supporting the WMD lies were wrong. So you are saying it's more logical conclusion to believe those that were wrong? What kind of stupid logic is that?
Where are the answers to all the other questions you said you'd respond to? Still waiting and waiting.
---Rocky on 10/30/11


Do you think people in those countries would be better off with their dictators? Or are you gauging actions in their countries by what is good for us instead of for them?
---Rocky on 10/29/11

Well, those who have taken their places are imposing even stricter muslim sharia law than before. So I'm pretty sure that's not good for them, especially their women. We know that kudafi and mubarak were much more liberal than the muslim brotherhood.
---Jed on 10/30/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Dating


Jed 10/29/11 (1/2)
you still haven't answered my question. Couldn't it be possible that Bush and the CIA was right all along and Hussein simply covered up the evidence
Surprise! Another distortion. I provided the answer to the question earlier.
Rocky (10/26/11)
Later U.S.-led inspections agreed that Iraq had earlier abandoned its WMD programs... (source: Wikipedia)
Did you even look at the Wikipedia article? More from same article:
On 10/6/2004, the head of the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) announced to the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee that the group found no evidence that Iraq had produced and stockpiled any weapons of mass destruction since 1991, when UN sanctions were imposed.
---Rocky on 10/29/11


Jed 10/28 (2/2)
Do you think it was smarter of Obama to support the removal of mubarak and kudafi without knowing what would replace him?
What would you have done?
Now with them gone, muslim extremists are gaining power in Egypt and Lybia that are worse than either of these dictators ever were.
Baloney. Have you no faith In democratic reform? Do you think people in those countries would be better off with their dictators? Or are you gauging actions in their countries by what is good for us instead of for them?
---Rocky on 10/29/11


Jed 10/28 (2/2)
If the CIA told you someone was creating nuclear bombs for terrorism would you not want to do something? Probably not.
Unbelievable!! I ASKED YOU MANY TIMES, PLEASE DON'T PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH AND ATTACK ME FOR YOUR WORDS. You try to weasel by using "Probably" but you're still doing it. You have NO good faith basis to say I would probably not want to do something. You have NO IDEA what I would do. Unbelievable. Earlier in your post you try to minimize that I caught you in one lie and then turn right around and distort again. You have no idea what constitutes critical thinking or rational discussion. You're an inveterate liar that just cannot stop.
---Rocky on 10/29/11


Rocky:
I recall you commented on the obvious difficulties of getting a message across on CN with the word limitation. You described it as trying to communicate in "sound bites". Understandably "sound bites" communication causes many misunderstandings.
I suggest it's best we all keep this in mind. Constant accusations of deceit against fellow bloggers only detracts from your argument as no usefull point is being made.

When I see constant accusations of deceit etc against fellow bloggers it reminds me of those in politics who use false shaming tactics against their political opponents.

You and most here recognize the difficulties of these word limits. Worth remembering when in heavy debating.
---Haz27 on 10/29/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Treatments


Jed: It is indeed possible that there were WMD in Iraq. That is true. However, since after we got there, we could not find any, I think that the previous claims by our government, indication that they were SURE that there were weapons of mass destruction, suggests that the claims were mistaken.

Every president makes mistakes, that is true. But I was disappointed that our then president seemed unwilling to accept he might have made a mistake.

Thus, I feel he PROBABLY made an honest mistake. I don't begrudge him anything for that
---Peter on 10/29/11


You people are simply amazing. Can't you just simply accept the seven days as seven literal days as it is written based upon faith? Everything written in the bible is based upon faith. Days just mean days, human days. How can a person reason out any other time period? (besides the fact that you people are too educated to believe the bible) Do you use the same logic about days as you do having faith in Christ? If that is the case, you faith in Christ is in vain.
---Steveng on 10/30/11


Jed 10/28 (1/2)
I'll rephrase just for you since you want to split hairs.
There is part of your problem right there. You consider being accurate vs. telling lies splitting hairs. You get upset with me for pointing out that you lie and distort but you keep doing it over and over and over.
MANY in the CIA and other intelligence agencies around the world concured that there were indeed weapons of mass destruction.
Yes, I accept that. And it's just as accurate to say MANY concluded there was not enough information to make that finding. And the second MANY were right. They were objective analysts, not providing data to support the conclusion Bush, Cheney and Rumsfield pushed for.
(continued)
---Rocky on 10/28/11


--Jed 10/28
Who are those "many"? I didn't make braod accusations like that
Unbelievable! Lying again already. And that was a double lie. First, my writing "Many said at the time he didn't have reasonable evidence" is not an accusation. That was my only use of "many" in that post.
Second, what is even BROADER than "many"? How about "EVERYONE".
Jed 10/28
Strange how EVERYONE at the CIA and other intelligence agencie...
And that is just looking at the same day on the same blog.. Man you really just can't stop lying.
I am waiting for your responses to my questions and challenges. Please make a stronger effort at not lying in the meantime.
---Rockoy on 10/28/11


Send a Free Blessings Ecard


Rocky, you still have not answered my question. Couldn't it be possible that Bush and the CIA was right all along and Hussein simply covered up the evidence during the several months of advanced warnings and hesitation on our part? Isn't that a more logical conclusion than saying that the CIA, the president, and other intelligence agencies around the world didn't know what they were talking about?
---Jed on 10/28/11


I vote that we elect Rocky president because he is the standard of what Truth really means. Everyone else lies, cheats, and distorts everything. None can be reliable or trusted but him, not even God's Word is reliable only parts of His Word are Truth. I thought someone else here on line was the only perfect one, but we now have two. I've wondered how they both would answer each other. Guess I will have to wait for that time to come. Two perfect persons answering each other, what a sight to see.
---Mark_V. on 10/29/11


I was embarrassed to finally find out the reasons for the Iraq war. Much, if not all, of what George W. Bush told us wasn't even close to being true or verifiable.

There probably were Weapons of Mass Destruction [WMD] in Iraq. Because the U.S.A. gave then to Iraq for attacking Iran in the early 1980's! Those were the WMDs that Saddam Hussein used against his own people.

I'm responsible for the slaughter of 100,000+ innocent Iraqis. Guilty as George W. Bush.

NO, the Iraq war was not worth it.
---Sag on 10/29/11


No war since WWII has been necesary.IMHO!
---shirley on 10/29/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Affiliate Program


---Jed 10/27/11 (4/4)
Cheney and Rumsfield, with their extensive high level military backgrounds, knew exactly what they were doing. I am sure Bush Jr. reviewed it with Bush Sr., not only a former President but former Director of the CIA, who would have cautioned him. In the least it was gross negligence with regard to WMD. But the continued equating of IRAQ with 9/11 terrorism was so wrong even Bush Jr. had to KNOW that he was lying. But he liked the popularity and power it gave him more than truth.
---Rocky on 10/28/11


Bush pushed the CIA for the finding, Bush never asked the questions he should about the weak data, and Bush lied repeatedly when he drummed up support and pushed America into the unjust war. -Rocky on 10/28/11

Who are those "many"? I didn't make braod accusations like that. I already proved how this is a lie. In 2004, the Senate Intelligence Committee unanimously approved a report acknowledging that it "did not find any evidence that administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments." You seemed to ignore that evidence, typical of you.
---Jed on 10/28/11


Why do you keep exaggerating and lying in your posts with terms like "all" and "everyone"
---Rocky on 10/28/11

I'm sorry Rocky, I'm sure there were a few that in these agencies that didn't agree or even know what they were talking about. I'll rephrase just for you since you want to split hairs. MANY in the CIA and other intelligence agencies around the world concured that there were indeed weapons of mass destruction. Is that better for you, probably not since you clearly disregard evidence I already posted to remain ignorant of truth. The point is Bush did not just make up these allegations. If the CIA told you someone was creating nuclear bombs for terrorism would you not want to do something? Probably not.
---Jed on 10/28/11


Jed 10/28/11
Bush's Claims were substantiated by intelligence information
No they were not. Many said at the time he didn't have reasonable evidence. It's obvious they were right.
If Democrats wish to contend they were "misled" into war, they should vent their spleen at the CIA, not Bush.
Bush pushed the CIA for the finding, Bush never asked the questions he should about the weak data, and Bush lied repeatedly when he drummed up support and pushed America into the unjust war.
I already reported Bush's admission about the data and the Senate Intelligence Committee findings in 2008, after the dust settled, that his administration "misrepresented the intelligence and the threat from Iraq".
---Rocky on 10/28/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Abortion Facts


Jed 10/28 (1/2)
Strange how everyone at the CIA and other intelligence agencies around the world was wrong too.
More gross exaggeration and obvious lies. Not EVERYONE either at CIA or the intelligence agencies around the world were saying it. What was clear was that Britain was the only other country willing to make a significant commitment and join Bush, most European allies were saying to continue with negotiations. Further after the war it was revealed what a low regard British intelligence had for the pre-war US data on WMD.

Why do you keep exaggerating and lying in your posts with terms like "all" and "everyone" Do you really not know what those words mean or just not care about truth?
(continued)
---Rocky on 10/28/11


Rocky, did you ever consider that Hessein could have taken advantage of the several opportunities that we gave him during several months of hesitation and warnings to relocate any weapons of mass destruction. Bush was not the only one saying they had them. Strange how everyone at the CIA and other intelligence agencies around the world was wrong too. Do you think it was smarter of Obama to support the removal of mubarak and kudafi without knowing what would replace him? Now with them gone, muslim extremists are gaining power in Egypt and Lybia that are worse than either of these dictators ever were. At least Bush stuck around to help build a democratic government in Iraq.
---Jed on 10/28/11


Either way, please repost any questions you have for me and I will be happy to answer.
--Jed 10/28/11
How did you miss the one I asked you 5 times? I have already posted them. You can look them up as easily as I can. And don't forget all the ones where I challenged you to show me where I wrote what you said I wrote. When you can't find them you owe me an apology for each one.
---Rocky on 10/28/11


I might think about educating on this you after you answer the many questions I have asked you on previous posts.
---Rocky on 10/28/11

I'm sorry Rocky, I must have missed those questions, or perhaps read them as personal insults. Either way, please repost any questions you have for me and I will be happy to answer.
---Jed on 10/28/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Acne Treatment


Rocky, You must have not read the rest of my post. Bush's Claims were substantiated by intelligence information from the CIA. If Democrats wish to contend they were "misled" into war, they should vent their spleen at the CIA, not Bush. In 2004, the Senate Intelligence Committee unanimously approved a report acknowledging that it "did not find any evidence that administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments." The following year, the bipartisan Robb-Silberman report similarly found "no indication that the intelligence community distorted the evidence regarding Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."
---Jed on 10/28/11


It is making a difference in Kurdistan (Northern Iraq). Saddam used poison gas on them a couple of times. Americans are heros for right now.
---Scott1 on 10/28/11


jed
why dont you google project for new american century which calls for the regime change in iraq during clinton years.

by the way, bush removed brutal dictator?
rumsfled shook hands with saddam in the 80s in its war with iran
shah of iran, noriega of panama, saudi kings, marcos of philippines were brutal corrupt dictators US supported.
---mike on 10/28/11


Rocky, please provide clear proof for this personal attack you have made on the Bush's.
--Jed on 10/28/11
I might think about educating on this you after you answer the many questions I have asked you on previous posts.
---Rocky on 10/28/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Bad Credit Loans


---Jed 10/27/11 (2/4)
There are hundreds of instances in the same book when God gave orders to put people to death for crimes.
Wow, you just ripped me a new one on another thread for allegedly equating my words with God's. I proved you are wrong that I did not, but here you are clearly equating God's commandment to man not to kill with his own orders to kill. Why?
(continued)
---Rocky on 10/28/11


---Jed 10/27/11 (3/4)
Third, there is a big difference between making claims based on flawed intelligence and knowingly propagating falsehood
This was not just flawed intelligence but a lack of intelliegence - both military and mental - a total lack of any significant proof of a program of WMD. The sketchy little bits and pieces they had, some of which were already questioned or refuted by analysts, did not show ANY substantial proof of WMD, let alone the level needed to justify war. And if Bush did not know this it is only because he chose not to ask because he wanted to go with a story that supported want he wanted to do.
---Rocky on 10/28/11


Also Cheney and Bush wanted to go back to Iraq and finish the job they helped start under Bush Sr. Bush's polls were declining again, they needed another war, and Iraq became the target. So they fabricated a story to justify it.
---Rocky on 10/28/11

Rocky, please provide clear proof for this personal attack you have made on the Bush's.
---Jed on 10/28/11


I reitterate: The war in Iraq was unjustified, ill conceived, and has lasted 8 1/2 years longer than it should have.
--NurseRobert 10/27/11
But they have oil. We were lead to believe that their oil would pay for most of the reconstruction, but we were screwed there too. And Iraq has a smaller army than North Korea. Even though most of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis, Saudi Arabia's our friend and were personally very close to both Bushs. Also Cheney and Bush wanted to go back to Iraq and finish the job they helped start under Bush Sr. Bush's polls were declining again, they needed another war, and Iraq became the target. So they fabricated a story to justify it.
---Rocky on 10/28/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Bankruptcy


Jed 10/27/11 (2/2)
Also, the war cost much less than Obama has spent on failed stimulus and other programs that have gained nothing
First the 2008 collapse happened on Bush's watch too - Obama is trying to handle the cataclysm he inherited from Bush - a fourth Bush disaster.
Second the Bush/Obama stimulus package kept the economy from imploding and kept us out of another depression like the Great Depression of the 30's and 40's. Just ask any reputable economist.
---Rocky on 10/28/11


Jed, I wouldn't begin to compare lives like that, but was it up to us to do that? If it was, then why didnt get involved in Darfur where 300,000 were massacred? Or in Ethiopia where 17,000 civilains killed.

For that matter, why havent we attacked North Korea, a terrorist state that is a higher risk to us than Iraq ever was?

I reitterate: The war in Iraq was unjustified, ill conceived, and has lasted 8 1/2 years longer than it should have.
---NurseRobert on 10/27/11


---Jed 10/27/11 (1/4)
Rocky, first you need to get the commandment right. It's referring to murder, not killing of any kind.
I believe what the Bible says, thou shalt not kill. Why do you say the Bible is not translated correctly and it really means "murder"?
I suppose there MIGHT be some times that killing is justified, but not when you start a WAR like Bush did, knowing there would be MASS KILLINGS.
(continued)
---Rocky on 10/27/11


NurseRobert, No I am not comparing any amount of money to human lives. I was comparring the money spent on the war to the amount of money wasted by Obama and democrats. Can you compare the worth of the soldeirs lost in the war to the countless lives that were taken and destroyed by Hussein and those that were saved by his removal from power?
---Jed on 10/27/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Cash Advance


Rocky, you finally shared a few things on these blogs, which are truth and makes sense.

But I must also say those who are in Christ are not under the Law, but are under Grace.
---Rob on 10/27/11


Jed, let me make sure I'm understanding you. You're comparing a war that cost 4500 American lives (we won't count the 112,000 Iraqi lives) and 32,500 American injuries to Obama's stimulus.

The cost of the war would mean nothing if it was a just war. This war was not, and could never be justified as one.
---NurseRobert on 10/27/11


Rocky, first you need to get the commandment right. It's referring to murder, not killing of any kind. There are hundreds of instances in the same book when God gave orders to put people to death for crimes. This is not murder. Secondly, we were not the ones who executed Hussein, the Iraqi's did. Thirdly, there is a big difference between making claims based on flawed intelligence and knowingly propagating falsehood. Bush's cliams concerning Iraq-Al Qaeda links, Hussein's possesion of biological and chemical weapons, as well as his operation of a nuclear weapons program were all substantiated by intelligence information that he received from the most informed and credible U.S. intelligence agents.
---Jed on 10/27/11


Jed 10/27/11 (1/2)
Weather the outcome was what we expected or not, the war did eliminated a vicious dictator
That does not change the fact that Bush lied to the people about WMD and Iraq's relationship to 9/11 and started an unjust war in violation of international law that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people.
Whatever happened to the commandment "thou shalt not kill"? It doesn't say "except dictators". In fact remember "render unto Caesar"? Every Christian should have opposed the war, sadly many American Christians did not.
Why do you support Bush over God's law?
(continued)
---Rocky on 10/27/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Credit Counseling


here are the facts

IRaq DID not attack US on 911
11 or the 19 hijackers were SAudis not iraqis
Binladen (saudi) is the mastermind


and the so called 'intelligence' failure bush is saying is a cop out, blaming the intelligence, not taking responsibility when he claimed 'I AM THE DECIDER'
---mike on 10/27/11


so called 'freedom' march in the middle east is happening.

is it because of iraqi 'freedom' or the tunisian who set himself on fire?
---mike on 10/27/11


Weather the outcome was what we expected or not, the war did eliminated a vicious dictator (and his sons) that oppressed and killed their own people. Also, the war cost much less than Obama has spent on failed stimulous and other programs that have gained nothing for us. So in relation to the amount of money that is wasted on stupid programs, including but not limited to social programs that only encourage laziness and do not actually help the truly needy, it was one of the better ways the money could have been spent.
---Jed on 10/27/11


Many other events happened and evidence found that vindicated Bush of all wrongdoing.
--Stevens 10/21/11
Hogwash. And Bush did finally admit he was wrong many, many years later.
Later U.S.-led inspections agreed that Iraq had earlier abandoned its WMD programs... Bush later said that the biggest regret of his presidency was "the intelligence failure" in Iraq while the Senate Intelligence Committee found in 2008 that his administration "misrepresented the intelligence and the threat from Iraq".
--Wikipedia "Iraq and weapons of mass destruction"
You probably still believe Nixon was not a "crook" and knew nothing about Watergate.
---Rocky on 10/26/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Relief


--Cluny 10/26/11 (3/3)
The public never would have supported that war but for the lies about WMD. Sadly for years after it was proven that Iraq had no WMD, Bush and Secretary Rice would never admit that we went to war for a false reason, instead spinning questions to emphasize the new justification of regime change. It was pathetic how they would not admit the obvious truth. Perhaps to compensate, Bush became obsessed with proclaiming himself the "Decider", trying to wrap himself in military glory.
---Rocky on 10/26/11


Decade of decline (2/2)
Free trade is good for business, its rich investors and high paid executives, but bad for the majority of workers who see wages going down, pensions raided and closed, and health benefits cut. Meanwhile the executives get bigger salaries and bigger bonuses. The strategic ramifications are also tremendous. One key part of our military strength was out industrial power. We are losing it. If we had to fight a WWIII today, we would be dependent on so many foreign sources for planes, vehicles, and computer components to make everything work. We need to get by the war and start focusing on basic economics and production, along with continuing on health care and education.
---Rocky on 10/26/11


1. Bush had a timeline.
2. Bush never said he was wrong.
3. Several tons of yellowcake was found (the stuff WMD are made) even thought techincally it's not WMD in itself.
4. Four mobile chemical laboratories built by the Germans were found buried under the desert sands.
5. Other chemicals to build chemical weapons were found and manufactured by France and again technically not WMD in itself.
6. Since we couldn't find the planners (bin Ladin, etc.), we would cut the funding of suicide bombers. Saddam was paying the bomber's families $30,000 each.
7. Saddam used chemical weapons on his own people, the Kurds and others.

Many other events happened and evidence found that vindicated Bush of all wrongdoing.
---Steveng on 10/26/11


bush & malaki agreed to pull out troops in 12 2011
--tami 10/26/11
That is true. Complete withdrawal by the end of 2011 is the date the great "Decider" decided. He signed the agreement that gave our word. And I saw it replayed on TV just last night. I also saw most of the Republican presidential contenders then bashing Obama for the Bush decision. What despicable behavior. Politics is in such a sad state of affairs these days. And the worst are the conservative Republicans that have announced their intent is to prevent an Obama re-election and that are sacrificing our economy to do it.
---Rocky on 10/26/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Settlement


It was Bush's idea to bring the troops home in December 2011. Obama is simply following Bush's timeline for the war.

Know your facts before you throw stones at Obama.
---Trish9863 on 10/26/11


Blogger.. So, then, where were they? Even Bush admitted he was wrong about WMD. I certainly don't miss Hussein either but it shouldn't have taken a war to get rid of him.

I fail to see how you can compare WWII to the war in Iraq. Two different fights for two different reasons.

The war in Iraq was a failed policy decision of the US. We shouldn't have gone there, we shouldn't have stayed there and we should have been out of there long before now.
---NurseRobert on 10/26/11


before obama critics say that it will be a mistake to pull out US troops
consider this
bush & malaki agreed to pull out troops in 12 2011 & then the show throwing incident happen.
---tami on 10/26/11


Decade of decline (1/2)
The biggest cost of the Iraq war isn't the hundreds of billions of dollars we spent or the thousands of American lives and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives it cost. The biggest cost is that it consumed public attention and interest while American suffered the greatest economic decline in history. And I don't mean just the 2008 debacle, but a whole decade of decline as unbridaled trade resulted in the loss of millions of jobs and many industries, jobs and industries we are unlikely ever to get back. Its still happening and we are still doing nothing about it.
(continued)
---Rocky on 10/26/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Distance Learning


I was watching daily show & they reported president karzai saying 'if pakistan is attack, we will choose over US.'
---allen on 10/26/11


here is the US there are public officials urging to CUT government spending but how much spend on iraq that could be used here in the US?

does not make any sense
---bill on 10/26/11


--Cluny 10/26/11 (1/3)
I said at the time that the only reason Bush fils was invading Iraq was to draw America's attention from his inability to find Osama bin Ladin.
It was not the only reason, nor the biggest. Bush saw an immediate, sharp drop in his opinion polls after his election. After 9/11, the country naturally rallied around it's President. When Bush said what any President would, his polls jumped sharply. When the polls started dipping, the way to goose them back up was to expand the war on terror and attack Afghanistan. Seeing the success of the "Wag the Dog" strategy, in boosting his popularity, Bush further expanded military operations into Iraq.
(continued)
---Rocky on 10/26/11


--Cluny 10/26/11 (2/3)
The intelligence saying Iraq had WMD was a joke, certainly not enough to mislead his top staff that all had superior credentials in military intelligence, including a VP that was a former Secretary of Defense, a Secretary of Defense who had previously served as a White House Chief of Staff and Secretary of Defense, and a Secretary of State that was the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. We also attacked Iraq although many experts pointed out it would actually divert considerable resources from the war on terror, while the Administration grossly overstated not only the case for WMD but Iraq's support of terrorism.
(continued)
---Rocky on 10/26/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Education


Starting the Iraq war was probably the worst foreign policy decision ever made by the United States.
---God.is.everywhere on 10/26/11


The conflict in Iraq worth it, WMD include more than nuclear weapons Iraq had a lot of chemical as was developing biologic delivery systems. The Chemical systems were effective and lethal ask the Kurdish population of Iraq.

Saddam Husain and his two sons were eliminated, from the touchier and terrorism of the Iraq populous. Iraq has free elections there are still tribal factions and political problems but it is better when Saddam was in control.

Obama's unnatural withdrawal is exceptionally dangerous as it creates a power vacuum that will be filled and what fills it may not be in the USA's best interest.

From the causality issue for the length of the conflict compared to WW II, Korea or SEA they are regrettable but low.
---Blogger9211 on 10/26/11


With all due respect to the
troops who gave up their health and in many cases their lives IT WAS NOT WORTH IT!
---Piierre on 10/26/11


"For one thing, she has killed more than three thousand of her own unborn citizens,"
According to NRLC and Wikipedia it's closer to 50 million since 1973 Roe vs Wade
---Chria9396 on 10/26/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Home Equity Loans


Lets see

-Almost 4500 Americans dead
-Almost 32,500 Americans wounded
-About $750 Billions on war operations. Total cost, including helping to rebuilt Iraq, lost equipment.. over $3 trillion.
-112,000 Iraqi civilians dead
-# of WMD - zero

No, it was not worth it..

---NurseRobert on 10/26/11


I said at the time that the only reason Bush fils was invading Iraq was to draw America's attention from his inability to find Osama bin Ladin.

I also said at the time that it would not prove to be in America's best interests to do so.

And since ObL is now dead, we should withdraw from Afghanistan.

And Libya and Kenya while we're at it. We are NOT the world's policeman.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 10/26/11


The war in Iraq was based on lies. The loss of our military serving there was definitely not worth it. I am glad our soldiers are coming home.
---Trish on 10/26/11


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.