1st: Its NOT a war. 2nd: It can't be "Won"

[Philosoraptor]

There will be no winning in Iraq. Its not a damned football game with a winner and a loser, everyone loses in this disaster.

Is it the foolish pride of a football fan that keeps the illusion going that we can win? Is it now, as in Vietnam, all about saving face?

The republican morons keep telling us we're at war, we're not, and we can win, we can't.

What will winning look like? Is there some great big score board in the sky with the winner and loser's scores posted for all to see?

We can withdraw instantly, or gradually, or never, it makes no diff, its a disaster, not a war, and it cannot ever be won, is that so hard to grasp?

[ProfessorGAC]

1. Good Points All. However. . .

. . .one point that no repubs (or war supporting dems) have ever been able to refute, is that the original fatwa in which bin Laden declared jihad on the United States, occurred in 1993. That means that we have been "at war" since then. If that's the case, how come all the conservatives did not line up and support Clinton and his every single action in defense of our way of life, then?

I've dropped that nugget on at least 25 people. I have gotten stone silence in response every single time.
The Professor

[madokie]

4. all so true, if they would have put an ounce of energy into working with

President Clinton we wouldn't find ourselves where we are today. talk about cutting their noses off to spite their faces if I ever seen one

[datasuspect]

8. i think the first fatwa was in 1996

and was a declaration of war (from an Islamic legal perspective, and not a formal declaration of war that a nation-state can pronounce) and the second was in 1998 which gave religious justification for killing all americans.

[ProfessorGAC]

2. Sheesh. Another Dupe

.

[auburngrad82]

3. That's what neocons like about the "war on terror". It's never-ending

They can continue to spend money and invade countries, all in the name of the WOT. But since there is no enemy force in the traditional sense, you can't beat them. It's what they like about it. They can keep blowing things up, all in the name of "making America safe."



Liberal bumper stickers

[July]

6. And that money they're spending goes to their family and friends,

the war profiteers -- the only people this war is benefitting so far. Nice racket for them. Too bad for us that it's our money.

[izzie]

5. I just posted on this. You do not win a war on abstractions.

You win wars on land armies of men and machines. This is one group fighting the ideals of other group. Democracy has moved around the world since the Reformations and it will come to the Middle East even as we try to stop it. The terrorist can not stop it any more than we can stop how they act. It has to come from the people. More people will want a type of one man one vote and they will get rid of the terrorist that way. Just as Communism came from the inside to go down. You wait it will happen in China also. Von Bismarck was cutting off the free press 150 years ago in Germany as they slowly moved to Democracy and wars did not stop them. It just slowed them down and caused a lot of trouble. The big problem is that since abstract thoughts do not need a military complex to get going, if the people want it, it leaves a big part of money making in the dust and we know to many make a living at it to get rid of it. Or even a part of it. Hard not to use it if you have it.Maybe Bush wanted to go down in History as the man who brought democracy to the Middle East so used the army to rush it along when we know it is coming and fasted without the wars we bring.

[bryant69]

7. That's the big question - what will victory look like?

There are some valid questions about how leaving Iraq will make us look, and how exactly we should effectuate our departure - and reasonable people can disagree on how best to handle our departure (as for how leaving Iraq will make us look, we should have figured that out before invading, but we didn't).

But waiting for a defnitive victory is waiting, more or less, forever.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Anarcho-Socialist]

9. The "war on terror" is not a war

Although the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq look like war to me. However when it comes to war everyone loses. For example, the U.S. lost 58,000 of its forces in Vietnam and hundreds of thousands left limbs behind, and millions hold the emotional scars. The Vietnamese who won the war saw millions of their own people killed, and had to suffer the turmoil of having to choose sides, and fearing Vietcong or U.S. reprisals based on their decisions.

Vietnam
Afghanistan
Iraq

The people most intimately involved in prosecuting the war each saw themselves as child-generals with their play-soldiers, each unable to grasp the scale of human suffering that would occur. They declared war because they could, rather than because of any imminent threat - never mind a last resort.