New RAND study says what many of us have been saying all along

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by maineman, Feb 11, 2008.

  1. maineman
    Offline

    maineman BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    13,003
    Thanks Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    guess
    Ratings:
    +572
    http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/11/rand.insurgencies/index.html

    The Rand Corp. report characterizes "U.S. military intervention and occupation in the Muslim world" as "at best inadequate, at worst counter-productive, and, on the whole, infeasible."

    I wonder if the hard core partisan republicans will denigrate the RAND Corporation as being surrender monkeys?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. mattskramer
    Offline

    mattskramer Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    5,852
    Thanks Received:
    359
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +359
    I think that they will want to know the political leaning of the people who run RAND. Then they will demand to know what charities they support. Has anyone there given money to a Democrat? Then they will try to link the organization with anti-war groups and claim bias. If that doesnÂ’t work, they will go searching for other items that give a different assessment (and perhaps say that there is no doubt that the war was warranted) LOL.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 4
  3. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,551
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,427
    Heh... and then they'll say it was funded by George Soros and that its a plot by Michael Moore and Sean Penn. :rofl: :cool:
     
  4. Skull Pilot
    Offline

    Skull Pilot Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,644
    Thanks Received:
    4,475
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +10,003
    while i hate to pigeon-hole myself as a republican, i have to say that not all people who tend to vote republican are or ever have been for invading iraq.

    it was a bonehead move that we will allbe paying for for a long long time to come
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,551
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,427
    Can't argue with you on that. Some people still turn themselves inside out, contorting their logic, to continue to try and justify it.
     
  6. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,509
    Thanks Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,920
    Wrong as usual. What most of us do is remind you that once we crossed into Iraq the REASONS for invading became moot, pointless , irrelevant. We are there and need to finish what we started, right or wrong to have started it to begin with.

    The cold heartless sorts would be those that demand we abandon Iraqis to death and enslavement because you do not like our President. That we cut and run because over 5 years 4000 troops have died and that somehow that is just horrible. Context is everything. The deaths in Iraq are equal to and in some cases less then those suffered in a comparable period in TRAINING.

    Like it or not we are committed and WE made Iraq a basket case after the invasion, we can not leave until it has a military capable of defending the country inside and out. AND we should stay in permanent bases if the Iraqi Government wants us too. IT is in our best National Interest.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. DeadCanDance
    Offline

    DeadCanDance Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,414
    Thanks Received:
    127
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +127

    Knowing what we know now, and given the cost in blood and treasure, did we make a mistake in invading Iraq? Yes or no? It's really a very simple question that everyone has an opinion on.
     
  8. Bern80
    Offline

    Bern80 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,094
    Thanks Received:
    720
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Ratings:
    +726
    Knowing what we know now? Of course it seems like a bad decision. You can't justifiably hold people accountable for their actions based on what you now know in hindsight, however. I am also a righty who believes that the U.S. being in Iraq simply is no longer worth it.

    Several reason have been given as to why we should stay. It's in our best interests and we are liberating a country. The problem is I'm not sure the U.S. can morally claim both of those things at the same time. We may be doing what we think is in our best interest (where the war on terror is concerned it probably isn't the best option) and at the same time we're trying to couch that by saying we're liberating a country. We can't claim a lot of moral high ground when we only liberate those countries that our in our best interests to do so.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. DeadCanDance
    Offline

    DeadCanDance Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,414
    Thanks Received:
    127
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +127

    thank you, it's very honest of you to admit that, in hindsight, the invading iraq was a huge and tragic mistake. I appreciate that honesty.

    It's why I'm willing to forgive politicians like Chuck Hagel or John Edwards. Even though they voted for the war, they at least have the intellectual honesty to admit it was a mistake to invade given hindsight.
     
  10. Bern80
    Offline

    Bern80 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,094
    Thanks Received:
    720
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Ratings:
    +726
    Where I keep getting hung up is also a moral issue. The problem is if we we're to leave now, while we have gotten our troops out of harms way, we have a pretty good idea what is going to happen in Iraq. We know things would probably get considerably worse for a lot of Iraqis. Again if you want to claim morality on the issue, then that needs to be pretty heavily weighed. Otherwise you (not you personally) need to have the 'cojones' to say what you're really after. As best and honestly as I can sum up that would be that the singular priority is to remove our armed forces from what you (again, not your personally) believe is a non-imperitive situation and the repurcussions to those we are leaving is secondary.
     

Share This Page