[ETWolverine]

hello excon,
i have a question?
please dont take this as disrespect.
Why are we talking about this?
isnt this yesterdays news?

That's because excon can't admit that any Bush policy could ever have been a good one. Even when faced with overwhelming evidence of that fact, excon is so blinded by his hatred of anything related to Bush that he cannot admit that Bush was right about Iraq. EVEN OBAMA has admitted that his position regarding Iraq was wrong... that the "troop surge" DID help things emmensely and that things are more peaceful in Iraq today. But Excon can't admit it. He neve will. And because he's stuck in the mode of Bush Derangement Syndrome, he's going to continue to try to paint the war in Iraq as a failure when it clearly is not.

Elliot

[excon]

he's going to continue to try to paint the war in Iraq as a failure when it clearly is not.

Hello again, El:

Clearly, huh? Ummmh, umhhh, ummmh.

excon

[ETWolverine]

Hello again, El:

Clearly, huh? Ummmh, umhhh, ummmh.

excon

Well, "clearly" to anyone but you.

[excon]

Hello again, El:

If we won, what did we get? A stronger Iran? Over 4,000 dead Americans? Billions and billions of wasted money??

Yeah, we won all right.

excon

[ETWolverine]

Yes we did win.

What we won:

25 million people no longer under a terrorist-supporting dictatorial regime. That's a good thing in anyone's estimate. (Except those who support dicatators, so I'm not quite sure how you feel about it.)

Access to Iraqi markets for sale of our products and purchase of theirs (including oil).

A relatively safe harbor and basing rights for our military.

A strategic logistics base for operations in other areas in the Middle East.

An example to the rest of the Middle East that we will support democratic reform. (Of course that positive example is being offset by Obama's NEGATIVE example in Iran. So although we won that particular item, Obama is throwing it out the window.)

I know that you have trouble thinking either globally or in the long term, but these are tangible gains from the war in Iraq. These qualify as "winning" in Iraq, whether you can accept it or not.

Yes, we won in Iraq. Saddam Hussein lost. AQ lost. The tribal/sectarian forces that tried to throw the country into a civil war lost.

Those forces may return and may be triumphant some time in the future, if we do not take care to guard against it. They COULD come back. But if they do, it won't be because we lost now. It will be because we weren't vigilant in the future.

As for billions and billions of wasted money, I don't see you screaming about wasted money when it comes to nationalized health care... an estimated $23 TRILLION in wasted money over the next 10 years, according to the CBO's numbers from yesterday. I guess wasted money only matters SOMETIMES. Personally, I don't see WINNING a war as wasted money. I see it as money well spent. If we had spent that money and LOST the war, it would be a waste. But we won, so it isn't.

As for the 4000 dead soldiers, I'm just happy that in the 6 years we've been in Iraq the casualty rate wasn't much higher. In much less time in WWII, we lost over 412,000 soldiers. 4000 is a large number when looked at by itself, but put in context (which I know you are loath to do, it's so much easier to argue when things are taken out of context), it is a relatively low number of casualties. And that too is a sign of victory in Iraq.

Elliot

[excon]

Hello again, El:

I asked what WE won. And all you can say is we could have lost more Americans...

So, that's winning?? Less dead than there could have been?? You guys are sick puppy's.

excon

[ETWolverine]

Hello again, El:

I asked what WE won. And all you can say is we could have lost more Americans....

So, that's winning??? Less dead than there could have been??? You guys are sick puppy's.

excon

You clearly didn't read the whole post. Typical,

I'll repeat it here:

25 million people no longer under a terrorist-supporting dictatorial regime. That's a good thing in anyone's estimate. (Except those who support dicatators, so I'm not quite sure how you feel about it.)

Access to Iraqi markets for sale of our products and purchase of theirs (including oil).

A relatively safe harbor and basing rights for our military.

A strategic logistics base for operations in other areas in the Middle East.

An example to the rest of the Middle East that we will support democratic reform. (Of course that positive example is being offset by Obama's NEGATIVE example in Iran. So although we won that particular item, Obama is throwing it out the window.)

[speechlesstx]

Hello again, El:

I asked what WE won. And all you can say is we could have lost more Americans....

So, that's winning??? Less dead than there could have been??? You guys are sick puppy's.

excon

What? Did you read anything besides the last paragraph?

[excon]

What? Did you read anything besides the last paragraph?

Hello again, Steve:

Yeah, I did. But I didn't see anything there that indicates we won a damn thing... I see only losses for us.

Besides, like the dufus before you, the Wolverine has declared victory just a tad too soon. In my view, Iraq will break apart into real ugly sectarian violence just as soon as we STOP keeping the lid on.

Look. I'm sure you THINK keeping 130,000 of our guys there forever is a victory. You certainly think a coup is the Constitution in action. You think a democratically elected president is a dictator. So, I'm sure you can convince yourself that we won something.

But, you ain't going to convince me.

excon

[speechlesstx]

Ex, back in the old days (before W, and with the exception of Darfur), doing something to end genocide and oppression was considered a good thing. I have always argued that if nothing else that is a victory. If you don't think that's a victory then perhaps you need to rethink some things. I doubt however you'll change your mind on that any more than you'll change your mind about Honduras preventing a coup by a wannabe dictator (and now alleged thief) flouting the constitution.

[excon]

Ex, back in the old days (before W, and with the exception of Darfur), doing something to end genocide and oppression was considered a good thing.

Hello again, Steve:

First: back in the old days, we didn't go into Iraq to rescue the people. That wasn't even on the plate.

Second: I don't think killing 500,000 or more Iraqi's saved them from anything.

Third: The genocide ISN'T over. In fact, we may have facilitated it. Just you watch.

excon

[speechlesstx]

Ex, you know I believe any innocent loss of life is tragic, but don't buy the Michael Moore wing's assertion of half a million dead Iraqi civilians. Even Iraq Body Count claims a fifth of that.

[excon]

Iraq Body Count claims a fifth of that.

Hello steve:

If I were you, I'd glom onto any argument I could too. What you say changes NOTHING!

It's not about how MANY innocent lives were lost. It's that INNOCENT lives were lost. If there was ONE Iraqi who lost his life due to our misadventure, that's too many.

excon

[speechlesstx]

Hello steve:

If I were you, I'd glom onto any argument I could too. What you say changes NOTHING!

It's not about how MANY innocent lives were lost. It's that INNOCENT lives were lost. If there was ONE Iraqi who lost his life due to our misadventure, that's too many.

I feel the same way about abortion but that's another can of worms. But like you said, "We gotta start on a equal playing field.... It starts with TRUTH." Grossly inflating the casualty count is not starting with the truth.

[ETWolverine]

Hello again, Steve:

Yeah, I did. But I didn't see anything there that indicates we won a damn thing... I see only losses for us.

I know you do. That's because you are blinded by BDS.

Luckily everyone else sees it closer to the way I do.

Besides, like the dufus before you, the Wolverine has declared victory just a tad too soon. In my view, Iraq will break apart into real ugly sectarian violence just as soon as we STOP keeping the lid on.

You do realize what you just said. You just said that our being there is a good thing because it is keeping the peace. Our being there is a POSITIVE thing.

Thanks for making my point for me... again.

Look. I'm sure you THINK keeping 130,000 of our guys there forever is a victory. You certainly think a coup is the Constitution in action. You think a democratically elected president is a dictator. So, I'm sure you can convince yourself that we won something.

But, you ain't going to convince me.

Excon

I know we won't. Your's is a particularly virulent example of BDS. The patient is blind, possibly permanently. But the contagion of this disease becomes less virulent the longer we have a Marxist as President. The longer Obama is in office, the better Bush looks to the public by contrast, thus overriding the effects of BDS.

Elliot

[ETWolverine]

Hello steve:

If I were you, I'd glom onto any argument I could too. What you say changes NOTHING!

It's not about how MANY innocent lives were lost. It's that INNOCENT lives were lost. If there was ONE Iraqi who lost his life due to our misadventure, that's too many.

excon

Innocents die every day. They most certainly die in wars. Even necessary wars. Even necessary wars, where one side is being particularly careful to minimize civilian casualties, even at the cost of their own lives. While the loss of any civilian is tragic, there were MANY fewer lives lost due to the war than were lost due to Saddam's actions against his own people. You know it (even if you won't admit it), I know it, and everyone else knows it too.

You can fool yourself all of the time, but not everyone else.

Elliot

[excon]

You do realize what you just said. You just said that our being there is a good thing because it is keeping the peace. Our being there is a POSITIVE thing.

Hello again, El:

Saddam WAS keeping the peace before we invaded. Didja forget?? I think you did. So, going in and killing a bunch of 'em to give 'em what they already had don't make no sense.

excon

[speechlesstx]

Hello again, El:

Saddam WAS keeping the peace before we invaded. Didja forget??? I think you did. So, going in and killing a bunch of 'em to give 'em what they already had don't make no sense.

excon

Well sure if you're OK with genocide, torture far beyond anything you can imagine at Gitmo, murder and forced relocation by intentional environmental destruction, gassing your own people, public executions, assassinating your political opponents, etc. as part of "keeping the peace."

[excon]

Well sure if you're ok with genocide, torture far beyond anything you can imagine at Gitmo, murder and forced relocation by intentional environmental destruction, gassing your own people, public executions, assassinating your political opponents, etc. as part of "keeping the peace."

Hello again, Steve:

You keep on changing the subject. Saddam was a bad guy. He killed his own people. Nonetheless, there WAS NO CIVIL WAR. We didn't go in to take him out because he was a bad guy. And CIVIL WAR will break out when we leave.

You can't change losing into victory while I'm here.

excon

[speechlesstx]

I'm changing the subject? I'm merely responding to whatever subject you're raising so don't throw that red herring at me.

Also...

We didn't go in to take him out because he was a bad guy.

We didn't? Didn't Elliot list the reasons, or did we just go there for the oil and to finish what Papa Bush started?