this is why I'm against the war in Iraq

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24428155

oldbeachbear's blog | login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Submitted by USArmybrat on Thu, 05/29/2008 - 9:32am.

My heart breaks to see such pain for one of our brave men and then to die after so much suffering. Unfortunately, this is a cost of war and many have suffered like this in this war and others. We had so many casualties in WWII and lost more on D-Day than we have in Iraq so far.But we couldn't let that be the reason to be against the war then and we shouldn't do so now, either. I feel that we can not honor those brave men and women if we constantly act like their deaths are in vain, that they have died for nothing. War is ugly and, yes, there has been many mistakes. I want us to be successful there so much, for those that have been wounded and scarred and for those that have left us. They deserve at least that, our support for what they fight for there.

Richard Hobbs's picture
Submitted by Richard Hobbs on Wed, 05/28/2008 - 8:00am.

Beach Bear,

No one in their right mind would have wanted anyone to have to endure what this hero went through. If U.S. Foreign Policy is to be run by Anecdotal evidence which causes such an emotional response, then we have very little hope for our future.

The war in Iraq and Afghanistan will be decided in years to come as being necessary evils, or huge mistakes. I'm hard pressed to remember any past historical examples that are appropriate but I suspect there are a few.

Hindsight is obviously 20/20 and time will tell us about the weapons of mass destruction. I know if Israel had not bombed the French Nuclear facility in Iraq back in 1983, (for which they were demonized INTERNATIONALLY), then Iraq would have had a nuclear weapon loaded into a scud missile, and ready to use during the first gulf war. (Israel could have tried the Kerry approach, and gotten permission from the global community, or talked to Sadamm face to face, like Obama thinks, but I think they did the right thing.) Bush said, and I happen to agree, that if we wait until a threat is imminent, that it is too late. More people will die if we wait until the bully first punches us in the face, before we swing our own first punch.

Liberals and Barack keep saying the War in Iraq has made us "less safe", well some of the facts are suggesting just the opposite.

John Hindracker wrote an interesting column where he talks about international terrorism across the globe against Americans and has found a strangely "unreported" occurrence, and that is, Iraq is keeping the terrorist so bottled up, that they can't fight us on our own shores. Al Quieda has pronounced Iraq as their Bunker Hill, and until it is won back under their control, they are unable to do anything else. Here is his relevant portions of his column.


Are We Safer?

On the stump, Barack Obama usually concludes his comments on Iraq by saying, "and it hasn't made us safer." It is an article of faith on the left that nothing the Bush administration has done has enhanced our security, and, on the contrary, its various alleged blunders have only contributed to the number of jihadists who want to attack us.

Empirically, however, it seems beyond dispute that something has made us safer since 2001. Over the course of the Bush administration, successful attacks on the United States and its interests overseas have dwindled to virtually nothing.

Some perspective here is required. While most Americans may not have been paying attention, a considerable number of terrorist attacks on America and American interests abroad were launched from the 1980s forward, too many of which were successful. What follows is a partial history:

1988
February: Marine Corps Lt. Colonel Higgens, Chief of the U.N. Truce Force, was kidnapped and murdered by Hezbollah.

December: Pan Am flight 103 from London to New York was blown up over Scotland, killing 270 people, including 35 from Syracuse University and a number of American military personnel.

1991
November: American University in Beirut bombed.

1993
January: A Pakistani terrorist opened fire outside CIA headquarters, killing two agents and wounding three.

February: World Trade Center bombed, killing six and injuring more than 1,000.

1995
January: Operation Bojinka, Osama bin Laden's plan to blow up 12 airliners over the Pacific Ocean, discovered.

November: Five Americans killed in attack on a U.S. Army office in Saudi Arabia.

1996
June: Truck bomb at Khobar Towers kills 19 American servicemen and injures 240.

June: Terrorist opens fire at top of Empire State Building, killing one.

1997
February: Palestinian opens fire at top of Empire State Building, killing one and wounding more than a dozen.

November: Terrorists murder four American oil company employees in Pakistan.

1998
January: U.S. Embassy in Peru bombed.

August: Simultaneous bomb attacks on U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania killed more than 300 people and injured over 5,000.

1999
October: Egypt Air flight 990 crashed off the coast of Massachusetts, killing 100 Americans among the more than 200 on board; the pilot yelled "Allahu Akbar!" as he steered the airplane into the ocean.

2000
October: A suicide boat exploded next to the U.S.S. Cole, killing 17 American sailors and injuring 39.

2001
September: Terrorists with four hijacked airplanes kill around 3,000 Americans in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.

December: Richard Reid, the "shoe bomber," tries to blow up a transatlantic flight, but is stopped by passengers.

The September 11 attack was a propaganda triumph for al Qaeda, celebrated by a dismaying number of Muslims around the world. Everyone expected that it would draw more Muslims to bin Laden's cause and that more such attacks would follow. In fact, though, what happened was quite different: the pace of successful jihadist attacks against the United States slowed, decelerated further after the onset of the Iraq war, and has now dwindled to essentially zero. Here is the record:

2002
October: Diplomat Laurence Foley murdered in Jordan, in an operation planned, directed and financed by Zarqawi in Iraq, perhaps with the complicity of Saddam's government.

2003
May: Suicide bombers killed 10 Americans, and killed and wounded many others, at housing compounds for westerners in Saudi Arabia.

October: More bombings of United States housing compounds in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia killed 26 and injured 160.

2004
There were no successful attacks inside the United States or against American interests abroad.

2005
There were no successful attacks inside the United States or against American interests abroad.

2006
There were no successful attacks inside the United States or against American interests abroad.

2007
There were no successful attacks inside the United States or against American interests abroad.

2008
So far, there have been no successful attacks inside the United States or against American interests abroad.

I have omitted from the above accounting a few "lone wolf" Islamic terrorist incidents, like the Washington, D.C. snipers, the Egyptian who attacked the El Al counter in Los Angeles, and an incident or two when a Muslim driver steered his vehicle into a crowd. These are, in a sense, exceptions that prove the rule, since the "lone wolves" were not, as far as we know, in contact with international Islamic terrorist groups and therefore could not have been detected by surveillance of terrorist conversations or interrogations of al Qaeda leaders.

It should also be noted that the decline in attacks on the U.S. was not the result of jihadists abandoning the field. Our government stopped a number of incipient attacks and broke up several terrorist cells, while Islamic terrorists continued to carry out successful attacks around the world, in England, Spain, Russia, Pakistan, Israel, Indonesia and elsewhere.

There are a number of possible reasons why our government's actions after September 11 may have made us safer. Overthrowing the Taliban and depriving al Qaeda of its training grounds in Afghanistan certainly impaired the effectiveness of that organization. Waterboarding three top al Qaeda leaders for a minute or so apiece may have given us the vital information we needed to head off plots in progress and to kill or apprehend three-quarters of al Qaeda's leadership. The National Security Agency's eavesdropping on international terrorist communications may have allowed us to identify and penetrate cells here in the U.S., as well as to identify and kill terrorists overseas. We may have penetrated al Qaeda's communications network, perhaps through the mysterious Naeem Noor Khan, whose laptop may have been the 21st century equivalent of the Enigma machine. Al Qaeda's announcement that Iraq is the central front in its war against the West, and its call for jihadis to find their way to Iraq to fight American troops, may have distracted the terrorists from attacks on the United States. The fact that al Qaeda loyalists gathered in Iraq, where they have been decimated by American and Iraqi troops, may have crippled their ability to launch attacks elsewhere. The conduct of al Qaeda in Iraq, which revealed that it is an organization of sociopaths, not freedom fighters, may have destroyed its credibility in the Islamic world. The Bush administration's skillful diplomacy may have convinced other nations to take stronger actions against their own domestic terrorists. (This certainly happened in Saudi Arabia, for whatever reason.) Our intelligence agencies may have gotten their act together after decades of failure. The Department of Homeland Security, despite its moments of obvious lameness, may not be as useless as many of us had thought.

No doubt there are officials inside the Bush administration who could better allocate credit among these, and probably other, explanations of our success in preventing terrorist attacks. But based on the clear historical record, it is obvious that the Bush administration has done something since 2001 that has dramatically improved our security against such attacks. To fail to recognize this, and to rail against the Bush administration's security policies as failures or worse, is to sow the seeds of greatly increased susceptibility to terrorist attack in the next administration.


AF A-10's picture
Submitted by AF A-10 on Wed, 05/28/2008 - 9:49am.

Beach Bear is pointing out that we are not seeing a return on our precious investments.

When difficult military operations are truly necessary, there is no need for propaganda. There is no need for spin. We would not have to spend thousands and thousands on PR trying to "sell" an operation. And, most importantly, we would not need to hide the cost of this war in bodies and casualties. We could give our fallen heroes warm welcomes home as opposed to hiding coffins from cameras. Let's air this out right here, Richard.

Scott McClellen is about to meet a firestorm from the GOP. Why? Because he has written a book which very personally explains his anger for being used to promote falsehoods and spin and propaganda on Iraq and the Valerie Plame story. I would say Scott McClellen knows this administration well. That gives him credibility, so his character WILL BE ATTACKED.

This is not hind sight being 20/20. This is Americans being absolutely, positively misled about the threat of Iraq. Even if Iraq possessed WMDs, they would have been no more of a threat than North Korea, Syria, or Pakistan. They, by our military presence there, would have been much less of a threat to us.

Richard, the FACTS are that we had 24/7 combat air coverage and presence over Iraq. They were a threat which was guaranteed destruction if they ever actually attempted an attack on us.

Fact: We, as a political administration, made a campaign out of discrediting the United Nations. I found it incredibly odd that we began pushing the need to enforce UN 1441: A resolution from an organization we felt was unjustified. I felt it incredible when we went against that same organization when they correctly found evidence to support the difficult concept of "preemptive war" to be lacking.

Richard, you can state all you want that Americans are safer because of invading Iraq. Unfortunately that does not make your statement true. We have buried more Americans than we did on 9/11. I would call those wonderful contractors, troops, and associates "U.S. interests." Al Qaeda is STRONGER than they were pre 9/11, Richard. Al Qaeda has more global members and operatives than pre 9/11 Richard.

As we spend money we don't have and lose the bravest and brightest among us in Iraq, what is the return on that investment of treasure and life? That is what Beach Bear is showing us front and center. We are trying to craft a military solution to a political problem of reconciling shiia, sunni, and kurds. For nearly 6 years I have heard from your side how everyone else is wrong, patriotism requires we support the war troops are in to support the troops, that success is right around the corner, just down the road, just over the hill.

Richard, how long are you willing to support military occupation in Iraq with troops dying before you somehow begin to even ponder that we may need to end such occupation? How many years of funerals in the dark of night, out of the public eye, are you willing to turn your attention from before you realize that we are not kept safe from Al Qaeda by troops occupying a country of 12 million + with only approximately 1000 al Qaeda operatives left in it?

Perhaps we are kept safe because we are finally doing the police work and investigative work that certain politicians talked about in 2004: Watch lists, airport and sea port security, eavesdropping through FISA courts.

The illusion you attempt to propagate that Iraq occupation has lead to domestic safety, while giving no credit to TSA, FBI, CIA, and Homeland security efforts is disingenuous and only serves to delay the inevitable conclusion that we are not well served by pouring a billion dollars every other week into Iraq with no return on our investment.

I have long since given up listening to those who were wrong in 2003, and who have been wrong every step of the way since.

Kevin "Hack" King


Submitted by oldbeachbear on Wed, 05/28/2008 - 10:09am.

you said it so much better. I want to read McClellon's book. I never dreamed they would fool us so bad about the war. They fooled us into giving our most cherished assets, our young boys. Killed, mangled, or mentaly broken. It isn't like Bush ever went to war.

It has taken Merlin years to die a slow ugly death. Because of people like you speaking up, I hope he won't be swept under the rug.

AF A-10's picture
Submitted by AF A-10 on Wed, 05/28/2008 - 10:36am.

And I mean nothing. I know how difficult it must be for alot of people to even imagine that they were misled or that their emotions post 9/11 were used against them. There are three days with respect to this war on al qaeda that I will never forget as long as I live:

1. The anger and profound sadness I felt on 9/11, watching so many of our fellow citizens die. It seemed like rape to me; a permanent loss of innocence.

2. My sense of pride and resolve as we went into Afghanistan to confront those who had attacked us.

3. True confusion and deep concern as I saw the case being made to invade Iraq in March of 2003. I was dumbfounded by so many credible people saying how quick and easy this war would be. I served under GHW Bush, and I agreed with him that a push to Baghdad would open a long and expensive chapter to our involvement in that region. I believe that the campaign we are currently prosecuting there shows how wise and correct George Bush 41 truly was. He does not get the credit he deserves.

Kevin "Hack" King


carbonunit52's picture
Submitted by carbonunit52 on Wed, 05/28/2008 - 9:26am.

In 2006 there were 17,034 murders in the US. So far this year, there have been 5,692 deaths due to drunken driving. I am still much more likely to be done in by local talent than a terrorist.


Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Tue, 05/27/2008 - 4:39pm.

Oldbears's Story Link

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


Submitted by oldbeachbear on Tue, 05/27/2008 - 4:51pm.

I guess I didn't do it right. Merlin is the face or war. I feel for him and so many others like him. You have to ask your self, is it worth that? I don't think so. Despite the fact we want oil, despite the fact we have done very little as a country but give the oil companies tax breaks to to find alternate resources, (now there is a contradiction)!
I know most of us didn't think doing this to Merlin is what we meant, but, he is the face of war. I have no family member there but I care for those kids. I want our boys home.

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Tue, 05/27/2008 - 5:09pm.

I would like to think that some sort of "endgame" strategy would have been modeled with all the possible scenarios to determine if we had wherewithal to stay an extended period. I really wish WMD were found.
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


Submitted by oldbeachbear on Tue, 05/27/2008 - 5:34pm.

me too. I have friends that live in my neighborhood that are from the middle east. They are good law abiding people who were terrified. I kept saying to them, I was sure they were gonna find those weapons, why else would we be there. I told them I was sure Bush knew something we didn't and just couldn't make it public. Well, here I sit with egg on my face, and look at our kids.

I remember the boys that came home from Viet Nam. I use to sit with them and they would cry. First it was guys I grew up with and then people I knew later. They were so hurt and troubled and weren't sure it was worth what they did. The worst thing I noticed in all of them was it was never finished in their minds. They may have saved someone, but their minds were still with the one they left behind. You could never convince them they did the best they could. It reminded me about something profound my father told be about war II.

He said he didn't blame the Germans, they were brainwashed, and that for me to tell my friends who were going to Viet Nam that I didn't believe in the war, I was hurting them. That the must fully believe in what they are fighting far.

I feel that we the people, much less those kids, are not a 100% behind this war, and our boys will suffer for it. I want to bring them home.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.