Candidates Rick Weiland and Larry Pressler both think re-engaging militarily in Iraq is a bad idea. Journalist Todd Epp says our previous engagement wasn't terribly successful.
The reasons for the Second Gulf War were fourfold:
- Get rid of weapons of mass destruction.
- Prevent or stop Iraq from being a terrorist haven.
- Democratize Iraq and make it an example to the Arab and Muslim worlds that Western liberal democracy can work in the sandbox of the Middle East.
- Have a dependable ally in Iraq to keep an eye on Iran [Todd Epp, "Maybe Saddam Wasn't So Bad After All," Northern Plains News, 2014.06.23].
Epp's scorecard:
- "Phantom"—there were no weapons of mass destruction rid of which to get.
- Approaching failure.
- Partial success in Kurdistan, where Epp has visited.
- Complete failure.
Hmm... is history's lesson that we should not monkey with Iraq, or that we need to monkey differently?
Epp dares say of Saddam Hussein what only the realest politikers would say: maybe the dictator we deposed was better than the alternative we created.
At least with him, things were bad. But bad is better than worse, like it is now with avowed terrorists knocking on Baghdad’s door, threatening to send their American and European-passported minions back to the West to spread terror.
We have unwittingly created the situation that we feared the most. All because Saddam was merely a bad man, not the worst man, in the region [Epp, 2014.06.23].
Foreign policy isn't easy. That's all the more reason to elect leaders on the basis of brains, experience, and practical policy proposals rather than hot-button slogans.
Mr. Epp chose not to publish my comment that the Kurds like Iraq better now than they did before W, et al. lied to the world about why the US invaded. Joe Biden is right to push partition and will make his case when he announces his intention to join the 2016 prez bid.
I wrote an editorial in 2003 saying basically the same thing. 41 knew Exactly what he was doing by staying out of there. The only option to the current situation would have been if the US stayed forever. But our departure was inevitable, and in 2003 I predicted in writing what is now going on. And that was one of my only strong editorials that no one disagreed with!
Saddam was the glue that held that country together. Like it or not,without him the inevitable is taking place. We enabled Hussein to get chemical weapons. Whatever nuclear components he had was because we sold them to him,as Bush 41 admitted at one time,if we know what he has we can control them and him better. Too bad he wasn't allowed to defend himself at his farce of a trial. I'd liked to have heard more of the stuff we did for Iraq.
41 blew it by not marching on Baghdad in the first Gulf War.
The question always was what fills the void? The idea that taking out Saddam was going to create a vacuum was heavily discussed in 2002. Were we just going to occupy it forever? Who was the puppet government that we'd prop up?
I will always be horrified that the US was responsible for another country's leader's death, whether right or wrong. Tit for tat is a bitch. Nothing preventing the same from happening to us. We laid the modern groundwork for it.
Exactly, Taunia.
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/middle-east/iraq/140622/5-big-winners
I don't get it; if we're the World's Cop, why don't we have them face down in the mud, cuffs on, while we go through their pockets?
The whole nation building thing is a fraud. We should leave it to the UN, who is usually more than glad to slither in and start collecting the graft and abusing the locals.
We should not have gone into Iraq the 2nd time. Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator similar to Josef Stalin but with air strikes and the no fly zone we basically neutralized his military and he still provided somewhat of a balance to Iran. Iran another country we interfered with supporting a coup in 1953 and they have good reason to be suspicious of the US but that is another subject. Saddam thru his brutality helped hold Iraq together.
There are thugs and dictators in numerous countries across the world but does that mean we have to be the world's policeman? No! We would go broke and not just financially. There are other ways to bring about change.
Our involvement in a military conflict should be an absolute last resort to be avoided any way we can.
About the only positive result of our adventure in Iraq is possibly an independent Kurdistan in the near future.
Already the right is warning about a shortage of oil if Iraq falls apart. How much oil imported or domestic would the US need if the money pissed away in Iraq had all been used to develop alternate green energy sources? I just slapped an image from IEEE on four girls from Lagos inventing a system to convert one liter of urine into six hours of electricity (how many watt hours not available) on my Facebook page. If four girls in Lagos can do that, what would the US have done with all the money poured into the fool's errand mission in Iraq? My guess is we could have a rapid light rail system that replaced all domestic airlines and ran off of solar electricity. Had the Nobel Chemist's idea of a "Hydrogen Economy" been pursued, we would have had all the fuel and fertilizer we need with zero carbon emission.
Every dollar wasted on Iraq is money that could make the US the envy of the world for good reasons.
"...Saddam was merely a bad man, not the worst man, in the region."
I don't know about this statement. He was a brutal dictator, and probably the worst in the region. You don't use chemical weapons on innocent people unless you are a sociopath.
The U.S. allied with him during and after the time he committed these atrocities, and provided intelligence and weaponry to Saddam that supported him in his chemical weapons attacks.
Douglas it's just another excuse for big oil to increase profits. It would be far better and less expensive for us to invest in conservation and further develop clean energy sources.
What DW said.
The Blindman
I'll go all stereo-type here, because in part, stereo-types are often based in truth. The only thing the ignorant, religious zealots in the Middle East will understand is a strong man wearing a mustache. That premise is why ignorant, religiously zealots are dangerous - whether there or here. The centuries are rife with knuckleheads drumming up the masses to kill in the name of religion. Yes, and many then, and now, profess being Christians or at least "godly".
The US had and has no business in Iraq, or redividing Iraq. Iraq is Iraq's problem as much as SD's republican caliphate is SD's problem. Soon enough each will die of their internal hypocrisies and dead weight. Until then, they need to live with their choices, action, and inaction.
And what DW wrote.
Dave B., a couple weeks ago, I caught part of the CNN bio on Bush Sr., which noted that one of his smartest moves as President was not to go dance on the Berlin Wall when it fell and not to rub it in when the Soviet Union collapsed. Add 41's restraint in Kuwait and Iraq, and we may have an interesting example of a President who will be remembered for the things he didn't do.
By the way, Dave, you should forward me a copy of that editorial. I would be fun to republish your prescience.
I, alas, can claim no such prescience. I was totally in post-Sept. 11 go-to-war mode. I bought the WMD argument.
What if war broke out between the Lutherans and Catholics in Germany? Whose side should we take?
Statehood for the tribes and Mexico.
Easy choice, Darrell: Lutherans. We didn't wage the Reformation for nothing.
Cranky, correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression we were much more committed to the concept of the United Nations right after World War II than we are now. Dare we advocate for a robust United Nations to deal with situations like Iraq? Or is there anything for outsiders to deal with?
dd appointed another protestant to a legislative post recently, did he not?
Dump oil—Doug is right! If we waged science as passionately as we wage war, we'd have our energy problem licked. We wouldn't need Saudi Arabia or Canada.
Of course, if we make oil obsolete before it runs out, we have to figure out what to do with all the angry jihadis and Exxon execs whose revenue streams will dry up.
Solar roadways would just about solve all of our energy problems and make our highways snow and ice clean. Think of it, getting up in the morning, go out and fire up the ole jalopy and off we go. Legitimately driving with not a care in the world while the snow melts as it lands on the roadway with no ice to put you in the ditch. Puts folks to work and keeps them safe. http://www.boiseweekly.com/CityDesk/archives/2014/06/23/idaho-solar-roadways-co-catches-attention-of-white-house-bill-nye
Rocky Balboa: The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It is a very mean and nasty place It will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me or nobody is going to hit as hard as life. But it ain't about how hard you're hit, it is about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward, how much can you take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done!
We have to have faith that our leaders are making the best choices they can. It's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback, but it's not so easy to do it right in the first place.
The good book says - Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.
The Big Lebowski quotes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZR58d77a4A
What would the world be like today if Al Gore had won the election in 2000?
Lutherans! Lutherans! Lutherans!
Rah! Rah! Rah!
Cory-if memory serves,wasn't it Bush 41's own ambassador or something,April Glaspie,that essentially gave Saddam Hussein tacit approval to invade Kuwait for stealing Iraq's oil,which was the basis for Bush starting Gulf War 1? Wasn't it the Bush administration that hired the PR firm that made up the whole Iraqi Army throwing Kuwaiti babies out of incubators lies to inflame the American public and get them to endorse the war?
Doug W-in America,with the trillions wasted in Iraq and Afghanistan,those four girls would have probably each received a fifty dollar scholarship and the rest of that money would be used for overhead and bonuses for shareholders.
We will never know the "What ifs?".
"Lutherans. We didn't wage the Reformation for nothing."
So Cory, are you no longer an atheist?
Steve, I am still an atheist. The we is general, historical, referring to my German forbears.
And as an atheist, I wholeheartedly reject Michael B's call to faith in our leaders and blissful ignorance of tomorrow. This blog, not to mention constitutional democracy and checks and balances, is all about questioning our leaders and discussing tomorrow quite vigorously.
Cory, the ecumenical movement will unite those two religious factions into a one-world New Age apostate religion in the name of Christianity. That will then set up the political power structure for the UN's one-world system. Note the Pope is currently pushing the Neo-Marxist agenda that lines up with the ELCA Social Gospel. That is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ, but instead will set up the anti-Christ.
That is one logical conclusion one gets from the Book of Revelation. Interesting to see if it does unfold.
Oh, for Pete's sake. Steve, that's nutty talk. Revelation offers us no policy guidance, other than to throw up our hands and pray for salvation. Revelation is Jesus in Agent Smith's black suit, telling us "That is the sound of inevitability."
We have big policy decisions to make. We have lessons to learn from Iraq and Saddam so that in the coming decades, which will roll on uninterrupted by any Biblical Apocalypse, we can choose better paths for nation and the world.
Sibby-the way you stretch and twist every comment makes one wonder if you might be part rubber band and part pretzel. Yet you always return to the same old same old neo- this and neo- that. Like a broken record broken record broken record ad nauseum.
Cory, I saw ISIS on CBS News this morning wearing black uniforms. You will find that in the Bible. The Middle East is a key issue for us Bible reading folks. So I agree with the importance on policy decision in that regard. I firmly believe ignoring Biblical prophecy in regard to those policy decisions is most important, especially for nonbelievers. What happens if the scenario I detailed begins to unfold? Should then nonbelievers need to consider changing their position?
And for believers, this is no time to just "throw up our hands and pray for salvation". We have the Great Commission on our plates.
Israel should be returned to 1947 borders or moved to Utah.
You are correct about the 47 borders Larry. As far as moving to Utah, the Jewish State and the Mormons would simply not get along. The only reason they Christians and Jews get along now is because fundies want the Jewish State to have the same time Biblical borders so they can be killed without a problem. Now if the Bundy ranch could be moved to Utah, we could then call it the Armageddon and that would all be taken care of. Ah Rapture, what a farce, not to be taken literally.
http://www.democracynow.org/2014/6/24/should_obama_go_to_tehran_how
Larry:
I published your comment. It went to my spam filter but I rescued it.
I know first hand from talking to my Kurdish friends how they suffered under Saddam. I also saw where he blew up mountain bridges to isolate them and even started building a dam to flood them out.
But the cost of the Second Gulf War was too high for the United States, IMHO, even though it benefited Iraqi Kurds. And many of the Kurds I talked to realize and appreciate the sacrifice the US, UK and the Coalition made and like the USA.
American foreign policy should be primarily about American interests. (Yes, I'm a chauvinist on this.) Notwithstanding the Kurds, I don't see how the Second Gulf War helped American interests.
Todd
What was the purpose of protecting Kurds from Saddam,only to let the Turks slaughter them? I remember hearing from soldiers saying the US would deliver supplies to the Kurds and then Turks would kill the Kurds and take their supplies.
Steve: "Cory, I saw ISIS on CBS News this morning wearing black uniforms. You will find that in the Bible. [...] I firmly believe ignoring Biblical prophecy in regard to those policy decisions is most important, especially for nonbelievers."
Wow... you mean the bible references CBS News? That's impressive - imagine they would probably want to mention that next to how many Emmy's they have won.
Oh you mean the Bible mentions someone wearing black? What an amazing prophecy. The next thing you will tell me is that it mentions an event which could somehow be interpreted to mean we might have a flood sometime in the next 1,000 years or that there will be an uprising in the only part of hte world that the authors knew existed at the time.
I might be impressed if they ever mentioned a kangaroo or if they foretold Jay Leno retiring from the same job twice... but alas I'm left with vauge writings translated dozens of times and manipulated by so many different men it makes a Playboy bunny blush.
Here is the thing Steve... I have a watch in my drawer that stopped working about a decade ago, but I retain it for sentimental reasons. Even though that watch is entirely worthless for its original purpose, it still tells the correct time twice a day.
Sometimes we see what we want to see based upon a moment in time, but if we stand back and see the whole picture, we realize how broken (and perhaps even worthless) things really are.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/25/us-iraq-security-idUSKBN0EZ0UV20140625
Darrell, Lutheran. See Iceland where they burned Catholics for firewood and the island had none for over 300 years. That is what religious zealotry does. The 'christian' religion of turning the other cheek, of treating ones neighbor as oneself, of not fretting over the spec in a neighbors eye while ignoring the log in ones own eye, et al.
Some of you got pretty carried away with the Catholic/Lutheran war thing. I was merely trying to draw a parallel with Iraq and it being a Sunni/Shi'ite war. Nuance.
U.S. made Iraq worse by "electing" George W. Bush and DICK Cheney.
Mr. Reifenrath, you forgot the Kurds and the Christians in your comparisons.
I'm a Lutheran pastor, duly ordained and all that stuff.
Lutherans have done some awfully reprehensible stuff. No excuses, no trade offs. Making people suffer for any reason is not abated by all the refugees settled, the children cared for, etc, etc. Both things are true. Very, very few people of any type of religious association can honestly say the same is not true of them. Mennonites? Quakers? Amish? Most sects of Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs? That's the closest ones I can think of in this moment.
The point is , "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone," is as true for a religious group as it is for individuals. It's as true for Lutherans as it is for some Muslims as it is for even the Roman Catholic Church. They've all done very bad things while continuing to do very good things. None are entirely good or entirely bad.
The fools are the ones who insist that their group is all good while the Other is all bad. Same with individuals.
It is true that Sadam gassed the Kurds, but he gassed the Iranians as well. The Kurds are not really that into Islam with either sects, but the Iranians are and he gassed them. That was with the United States full blessing. In fact, Donald Rumsfeld delivered the goods and told him all was well and to keep doing it.
The one thing Sadam did though, was he was like Marshall Josip Tito. Tito held Yugoslavia together even poking the ruskies in the eye over dealing with the United States, but he held the country together until he died. Sadam did the same and by doing so, all religious sects lived together there including Christians. Of course, oil is our God and our Devil all rolled into one, so we changed the course and that was that. By the way, the United States also basically gave Sadam the green light to go into Kuwait during the first Bush's term. Kuwait was once a part of the drawn up map of Iraq and Iraq had always laid claim to that piece of sand with oil under it.
You never know where a nuance will take us here, Darrell! :-)
Steve, if your situation unfolds, and if Revelation preordains it, there is nothing for us to do. What's the point of trying? Neither the Devil nor God need my help to play out the cosmic drama.
Fortunately, the world spins on. God does not lower the curtain. We have to study, talk, and make informed policy choices.
George W. Bush apparently believed that America's pre-emptive attack on Iraq was required by the gog/magog biblical prophecy.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2009/08/gog-magog-and-george-bush
that's right. somehow forgotten that little big man bush's war against his daddy's neme
ses was Pre-emptive, not just without foundation. oh sheit.