Does anyone care we won the war in IRAQ?

[JRK]

You cannot figure that out?
what did go there to do?

1) weapons? gone
2) Saddam? gone
3) Dictatorship? gone
4) AL quid-ea in Iraq? broken

More enemies, less friends. More terrorists who want to do harm to America. Al Queda was not even in Iraq before we invaded. Yes, the weapons that were not there are gone. Before you say that we won or it was worth it, you have to wait and see what happens when we leave

Al queda was in Iraq before we invaded
preparing for war
Al Qaeda Document: Zarqawi Came to Iraq Before The War To Prepare The Fight Against U.S
There were many accounts about Zarqawi presence in Iraq before the war in particular in Northern Iraq with “Ansar Al Islam” an active Al Qaeda affiliated terrorist group that was present in the Kurdish areas of Iraq long before the war started. The document also proves that Ansar Al Islam helped Al Qaeda members establish themselves in Iraq before the war started.

 

[NoNukes]

More enemies, less friends. More terrorists who want to do harm to America. Al Queda was not even in Iraq before we invaded. Yes, the weapons that were not there are gone. Before you say that we won or it was worth it, you have to wait and see what happens when we leave

Al queda was in Iraq before we invaded
preparing for war
Al Qaeda Document: Zarqawi Came to Iraq Before The War To Prepare The Fight Against U.S
There were many accounts about Zarqawi presence in Iraq before the war in particular in Northern Iraq with “Ansar Al Islam” an active Al Qaeda affiliated terrorist group that was present in the Kurdish areas of Iraq long before the war started. The document also proves that Ansar Al Islam helped Al Qaeda members establish themselves in Iraq before the war started.

And that is the only part that you can attempt to challenge. Thank you.

 

[JRK]

I have realized that the liberals are going to do what ever it takes to taint the great victory in Iraq
Does anyone realize that war is over and it looks like we will be 100% gone in 6 months?
That there is a republic in place?
and that women vote and hold office?
I had no idea that the liberal media and there cock suckers would go to the level they have to make the troops look bad and make the success they fought hard for look like, well ask Drock and that crew
I dont even know how to explain it
DOES ANYBODY CARE WE WON?

I won't argue that some, if not a lot of good came out of it.

But the question remains......

"Was it the right decision in the first place and does it justify the loss of thousands of our kids in the military (not to mention what it cost us financially)".

There are LOTS of backward nations where there is "no republic in place" and "women cannot vote or hold office". If you're using that to justify the enormous loss of life and money we spent then I strongly disagree. That would mean we should start invading and occupying other nations under the same banner.

Yes, let's celebrate our victory. Let's honor the soldiers that gave us that victory. But let's further honor the soldiers with facing the truth that invading Iraq was wrong, plain and simple. It could arguably be the largest foreign policy blunder in the history of the United States. And we must never do that again.

.

For what ever reasons you feel it was wrong I have come to a point that those like you have made your mind up no matter what the facts are

The cost and length we were there was fighting these guys in Iraq, not the Iraqis
This is confirmed in the amount of time the first Iraq war was compared to this
Right away one has re-think his position I would think

There were many accounts about Zarqawi presence in Iraq before the war in particular in Northern Iraq with “Ansar Al Islam” an active Al Qaeda affiliated terrorist group that was present in the Kurdish areas of Iraq long before the war started. The document also proves that Ansar Al Islam helped Al Qaeda members establish themselves in Iraq before the war started.
Al Qaeda Document: Zarqawi Came to Iraq Before The War To Prepare The Fight Against U.S

 

[Dot Com]

are we better off?
Was it worth 1 trillion in tax payers wealth?

Most of the cost and most of the reward for the effort was not fighting Iraqis
It was fighting Al Queida
al-Qaeda in Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1 trillion? Where you get that figure? Seems a tad low.

 

[kiwiman127]

I'm not sure we will know for some time what the war has done to the region. Secondly, dropping bombs on Arab holy land is a recruiting poster for future terrorists - so it's debatable if it was a net safety gain. Only time will tell if brute military force and high civilian death counts were, in this instance, a better strategy than a lasting regional solution, e.g., did we harm our interests by removing a major counterweight to Iran? I'm not sure anyone has a crystal ball on this one.

More importantly, the war was arguably a failure strictly on cost/reward basis - we spent a massive amount of money on an evil man who did not attack us... a man who was so weakened by 10 years of sanctions and military fly-overs that he did not pose much of a threat. On a more complicated vein, I think it is misleading to call Iraq a war in the conventional sense. Meaning: I don't think we went to war because of a physical threat, e.g., evidence of Hussein's link to Bin Laden and 9/11 has been seriously challenged. In reality, regime change in Iraq was a very important policy going back to the Clinton administration. When Bush came into office - prior to 9/11 - his terrorism advisor (hired decades ago by Reagan) asked him to focus on Al Qaeda, but he was rebuked. The Bush administration had decided that Iraq was their best doorway into the region long before they turned 15 guys with box cutters into a force the size of Germany in the 30s.

I'm wondering if you might consider some of the broader, more complicated reasons for the war - like oil currencies (-I'm not even talking about oil itself). Did you know that both Iraq and Iran were threatening to defect from the dollar to the Euro? Do you know what that decision would do to our economy? I don't maintain this is the single reason for the war - especially since there is no single reason - but I do worry that the Republican leadership has not provided their voters with anything even approaching the whole story. It seems like much of the population literally cannot depart from the evil doer narrative, which is far too simplistic.

Every nation claims to be saving the world from evil whenever they intervene anywhere. Any high school kid worth his salt realizes that the United States Government often gets in bed with dictators if those dictators are willing to protect US interests. Just look at our relation to the Shaw, or Reagan's relationship to Pinochet, Hussein, or the "Freedom Fighters" in Afghanistan, i.e., the mujahideen, which was the embryonic form of Al Qaeda. I guess what I'm saying is that it would be nice if you looked into the history of our military and political intervention in the region - it's much more complicated than fighting evil doers. And I think the Left is silly for thinking we should never use military force to protect our access and control of world energy supplies. American ascendency and power is deeply tied to oil (in the same way that prior superpowers or empires successfully exploited the most vital resources of their epoch). Like it or not, the American economy was built on suburban expansion- indeed, we built the largest network of roads in history, which roads lead to massive energy sucking shopping malls and large homes. Cheap oil was and is the lifeblood of the USA, the largest motoring culture that history has ever seen. Does anyone realize how much oil the Pentagon uses to project force around the globe? A rise in oil prices would (and has) destroyed us. (We get 80% of our energy from oil; China gets less than 50% - and Europe subscribed to a more condensed urbanism with a much higher reliance on trains). Which is to say: as world supplies diminish and demand increases, the US, more than any other nation, is faced with having to make bankrupting military choices that simply have not been explained to the American people - hence the simplicity of this thread's lead post. (Carter correctly predicted the consequences of our oil dependence, but Reagan was able to convince America that he was a crazy Lefty trying to construct an energy bureaucracy over American freedom)

Regardless JRK, be very careful with rightwing talk radio or mass market TV stations - they, as a rule, never talk about geopolitics, e.g., Sean Hannity categorically will not discuss our former relationship with say the Shaw, that is, he leaves his audience functionally illiterate on very important matters about how and why we intervene abroad. Like Bush, he draws on simplistic Biblical narratives of good versus evil - the redeemer nation versus the evil dictator.

I wonder if you might consider some broader issues that affected our decision to intervene in the region. Some of those reasons even make sense. There is a complicated macroeconomic picture that you might do well to study:

http://home.aubg.bg/faculty/kpetrov/Other/Textbook Downloads/Clark - Petrodollar Warfare.pdf

(Hey JRK: if you want to try a neat trick, you might ask if the country was better off before or after the Iraq War. Washington's jiggery pokery with the war expense is the worst kept secret in history. Both parties have covered up the cost. I'm just saying you may some day learn that the real cost is larger than anyone ever imagined. We might have reached a point where the US can no longer effectively project force to meet it's objectives and influence world affairs. This tends to happen to Empires in their final days. Eventually they lose the financial and tactical ability to control the world. . . and a new nation takes their place, like China, who didn't fall into the same oil trap and has built their power from a different house of cards)

are we better off?
Was it worth 1 trillion in tax payers wealth?

Most of the cost and most of the reward for the effort was not fighting Iraqis
It was fighting Al Queida
al-Qaeda in Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Uh, the cost is going to be over 2 trillion dollars when one figures in just the rehab/treatment of our wounded troops for both physical and mental injuries. That doesn't count the replacement of equipment damaged by Iraq's sand laden environment or the future financial aid to Iraq's government.
Secondly, Zarqawi didn't unite with al Qaeda until 2004, a year after the US invasion. The US invasion of Iraq was a great recruiting tool for Al Qaeda, it provided the targets for Al Qaeda, our living troops.
The US actions in Iraq didn't weaken Qaeda. What eventually took al Qaeda out of their game was the drone attacks that killed many of their leaders, plus the killing of bin Laden by our Special Forces. No troops died in those successful US attacks on al Qaeda.

 

[JRK]

are we better off?
Was it worth 1 trillion in tax payers wealth?

Most of the cost and most of the reward for the effort was not fighting Iraqis
It was fighting Al Queida
al-Qaeda in Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1 trillion? Where you get that figure? Seems a tad low.

CBO: Eight Years Of Iraq War Cost Less Than Stimulus Act | Fox News
thats 800 billion from the CBO
in all reality we came to a point in my opinion those troops cost the same in Iraq after here than if they were in Korea or Germany
we are going to be totally out of there in weeks probably
White House Willing To Keep 10,000 U.S. Troops In Iraq, Officials Say | Fox News

 

[kiwiman127]

are we better off?
Was it worth 1 trillion in tax payers wealth?

Most of the cost and most of the reward for the effort was not fighting Iraqis
It was fighting Al Queida
al-Qaeda in Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1 trillion? Where you get that figure? Seems a tad low.

CBO: Eight Years Of Iraq War Cost Less Than Stimulus Act | Fox News
thats 800 billion from the CBO
in all reality we came to a point in my opinion those troops cost the same in Iraq after here than if they were in Korea or Germany
we are going to be totally out of there in weeks probably
White House Willing To Keep 10,000 U.S. Troops In Iraq, Officials Say | Fox News

You are ignoring the long-term costs of invading Iraq.

The true cost of the Iraq war: $3 trillion and beyond
The true cost of the Iraq war: $3 trillion and beyond

 

[BlindBoo]

Depends on how you define victory.

 

[JRK]

1 trillion? Where you get that figure? Seems a tad low.

CBO: Eight Years Of Iraq War Cost Less Than Stimulus Act | Fox News
thats 800 billion from the CBO
in all reality we came to a point in my opinion those troops cost the same in Iraq after here than if they were in Korea or Germany
we are going to be totally out of there in weeks probably
White House Willing To Keep 10,000 U.S. Troops In Iraq, Officials Say | Fox News

You are ignoring the long-term costs of invading Iraq.

The true cost of the Iraq war: $3 trillion and beyond
The true cost of the Iraq war: $3 trillion and beyond

I have seen that link before
I find it hard to imagine the war in Iraq has cost less than 1 trillion to date and will cost 2 trillion more when we are finished there now and will 100% done in weeks
Its a myth
I am sorry, its a myth
there is no way its going to cost 2 trillion dollars to care for the soldiers who will need our help
probably less than 200 million

 

[JRK]

Depends on how you define victory.

Boo we are done
Iraq has asked us to leave
we have republic in place
no more issues with weapons there
Saddam is gone
I dont know, sounds like the troops did there job to me

 

[kiwiman127]

Depends on how you define victory.

And who really knows what will happen in the future of Iraq. Iran and Iraq seem to be getting pretty chummy.

Iran-Iraq relations revisited: energy cooperation
Iran-Iraq relations revisited: energy cooperation « The Gulf Research Unit's Blog

'Iraq-Iran relations enter new stage'"
PressTV - 'Iraq-Iran relations enter new stage'

Talabani and Ahmadinejad talk of importance of Iraq-Iran relations
Talabani and Ahmadinejad talk of importance of Iraq-Iran relations | Politics | AKNEWS.com

Iran-Iraq Relation
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RS22323.pdf

Ahmadinejad in Iraq / Baghdad's new strategic partner
Ahmadinejad in Iraq / Baghdad's new strategic partner - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

Well,,,is winning, opening the door for Ahmadinejad and Iran to influence Iraq? Facts show that Iran has benefiited from the US-Iraqi War

 

[JRK]

Depends on how you define victory.

And who really knows what will happen in the future of Iraq. Iran and Iraq seem to be getting pretty chummy.

Iran-Iraq relations revisited: energy cooperation
Iran-Iraq relations revisited: energy cooperation « The Gulf Research Unit's Blog

'Iraq-Iran relations enter new stage'"
PressTV - 'Iraq-Iran relations enter new stage'

Talabani and Ahmadinejad talk of importance of Iraq-Iran relations
Talabani and Ahmadinejad talk of importance of Iraq-Iran relations | Politics | AKNEWS.com

Iran-Iraq Relation
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RS22323.pdf

Ahmadinejad in Iraq / Baghdad's new strategic partner
Ahmadinejad in Iraq / Baghdad's new strategic partner - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

Well,,,is winning, opening the door for Ahmadinejad and Iran to influence Iraq? Facts show that Iran has benefiited from the US-Iraqi War

I am not sure what to think about all of that
I am not saying this last accusation of trying to make this war look to be failure is not true
I just find it hard to swallow when in Iran there coming to an end and in Iraq its just a start
also there seems to be a much different attitude when it comes to 62% of Iraqis voting in the last election and 100s being murdered after the last Iranian election

keep looking and in time I guess this will take the place of no WMDs
good luck with it

 

[NYcarbineer]

We should have never invaded Iraq in 1991. Iraq's dispute with Kuwait was none of our business.

Had we not meddled in Arab affairs at that point, we would not have eventually ended up with military bases in Saudi Arabia, Bin Laden would not have been handed his excuse to launch a jihad or whatever against the US, 9/11 would not have happened, Bush would not have been able to distort 9/11 into a justification for invading Iraq again.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Everyone who loves the Iraq War put your hands up and cheerfully chant

"HEZ-BOLL-AH! HEZ-BOLL-AH! YEAHHHHHHHHH, WE LOVE YOU, WE TRUST YOU TO RUN IRAQ!!!!!"

 

[kiwiman127]

CBO: Eight Years Of Iraq War Cost Less Than Stimulus Act | Fox News
thats 800 billion from the CBO
in all reality we came to a point in my opinion those troops cost the same in Iraq after here than if they were in Korea or Germany
we are going to be totally out of there in weeks probably
White House Willing To Keep 10,000 U.S. Troops In Iraq, Officials Say | Fox News

You are ignoring the long-term costs of invading Iraq.

The true cost of the Iraq war: $3 trillion and beyond
The true cost of the Iraq war: $3 trillion and beyond

I have seen that link before
I find it hard to imagine the war in Iraq has cost less than 1 trillion to date and will cost 2 trillion more when we are finished there now and will 100% done in weeks
Its a myth
I am sorry, its a myth
there is no way its going to cost 2 trillion dollars to care for the soldiers who will need our help
probably less than 200 million

It's a myth? According to the CBO, the costs have already exceeded your myth!


Current and Projected Future Costs of Caring for Veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan War

By 2010, the actual data collected on the veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan, including their physical medical needs, incidence of mental health conditions, and disability claims, has already far exceeded the 2008 Stiglitz and Bilmes estimates and certainly superseded the initial CBO projections. In October 2010, CBO issued a new report which substantially increased its projections for the medical cost of veterans care. The new CBO analysis is consistent with the medical cost estimates outlined in this paper. However,
CBO does not include the cost of paying disability benefits, Social Security compensation, or other compensation that will also be paid throughout the veterans’ lifetimes.
The more-than-$2-trillion war

 

[kiwiman127]

Depends on how you define victory.

And who really knows what will happen in the future of Iraq. Iran and Iraq seem to be getting pretty chummy.

Iran-Iraq relations revisited: energy cooperation
Iran-Iraq relations revisited: energy cooperation « The Gulf Research Unit's Blog

'Iraq-Iran relations enter new stage'"
PressTV - 'Iraq-Iran relations enter new stage'

Talabani and Ahmadinejad talk of importance of Iraq-Iran relations
Talabani and Ahmadinejad talk of importance of Iraq-Iran relations | Politics | AKNEWS.com

Iran-Iraq Relation
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RS22323.pdf

Ahmadinejad in Iraq / Baghdad's new strategic partner
Ahmadinejad in Iraq / Baghdad's new strategic partner - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

Well,,,is winning, opening the door for Ahmadinejad and Iran to influence Iraq? Facts show that Iran has benefited from the US-Iraqi War

I am not sure what to think about all of that
I am not saying this last accusation of trying to make this war look to be failure is not true
I just find it hard to swallow when in Iran there coming to an end and in Iraq its just a start
also there seems to be a much different attitude when it comes to 62% of Iraqis voting in the last election and 100s being murdered after the last Iranian election

keep looking and in time I guess this will take the place of no WMDs
good luck with it

I'm just stating the cold hard facts, while the US leaves Iraq, Iran implants it's presence.
And your Yellow Cake claim has already been put to bed.

 

[JRK]

You are ignoring the long-term costs of invading Iraq.

The true cost of the Iraq war: $3 trillion and beyond
The true cost of the Iraq war: $3 trillion and beyond

I have seen that link before
I find it hard to imagine the war in Iraq has cost less than 1 trillion to date and will cost 2 trillion more when we are finished there now and will 100% done in weeks
Its a myth
I am sorry, its a myth
there is no way its going to cost 2 trillion dollars to care for the soldiers who will need our help
probably less than 200 million

It's a myth? According to the CBO, the costs have already exceeded your myth!


Current and Projected Future Costs of Caring for Veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan War

By 2010, the actual data collected on the veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan, including their physical medical needs, incidence of mental health conditions, and disability claims, has already far exceeded the 2008 Stiglitz and Bilmes estimates and certainly superseded the initial CBO projections. In October 2010, CBO issued a new report which substantially increased its projections for the medical cost of veterans care. The new CBO analysis is consistent with the medical cost estimates outlined in this paper. However,
CBO does not include the cost of paying disability benefits, Social Security compensation, or other compensation that will also be paid throughout the veterans’ lifetimes.
The more-than-$2-trillion war

My info referred to Iraq only
Please use accurate information when talking about what I said and did not say

That's an opinion, but over the next 40 years the final cost could be 2 trillion
Of course the closing of bases in Saudi and Kuwait along with the extra funds we were giving the UN to get kick backs from the oil for food program will never be figured into these numbers
also
No matter what the thought is On iaq (even though we were fighting the same people) surely the Afghanistan war was one we had no choice

 

[JRK]

i want to make something very clear to everyone
i hate war
I HATE VIOLENCE
These posts have been telling the side of these stories that have not been told in the main stream media
there task of creating the level of hate towards the GOP was a huge success
I thought it important to tell the truth on these events that to be hones I wish never would have happened
NEVER
NO WARS
NO VIOLENCE
NO SADDAM
NO OBL

 

[kiwiman127]

I have seen that link before
I find it hard to imagine the war in Iraq has cost less than 1 trillion to date and will cost 2 trillion more when we are finished there now and will 100% done in weeks
Its a myth
I am sorry, its a myth
there is no way its going to cost 2 trillion dollars to care for the soldiers who will need our help
probably less than 200 million

It's a myth? According to the CBO, the costs have already exceeded your myth!


Current and Projected Future Costs of Caring for Veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan War

By 2010, the actual data collected on the veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan, including their physical medical needs, incidence of mental health conditions, and disability claims, has already far exceeded the 2008 Stiglitz and Bilmes estimates and certainly superseded the initial CBO projections. In October 2010, CBO issued a new report which substantially increased its projections for the medical cost of veterans care. The new CBO analysis is consistent with the medical cost estimates outlined in this paper. However,
CBO does not include the cost of paying disability benefits, Social Security compensation, or other compensation that will also be paid throughout the veterans’ lifetimes.
The more-than-$2-trillion war

My info referred to Iraq only
Please use accurate information when talking about what I said and did not say

That's an opinion, but over the next 40 years the final cost could be 2 trillion
Of course the closing of bases in Saudi and Kuwait along with the extra funds we were giving the UN to get kick backs from the oil for food program will never be figured into these numbers
also
No matter what the thought is On iaq (even though we were fighting the same people) surely the Afghanistan war was one we had no choice

At this point, I can only find info that covers both wars. Of course, many of our troops went from one war to the other war. But why they are intertwined is the rise of PTSD which is prominent with both environments. Considering our troop size in the Iraq theater was much larger, you can assume that the percentage of those numbers dominate the total figures. We're still looking a 2 trillion dollars and more importantly lose lives and the lifetime ruination of tens of thousands of lives.
Also, I was 100% behind going into Afghanistan, I did however get really pissed when the US diverted much of it's resources away from Afghanistan and towards Iraq. Like I said earlier, I doubt we'd be in Afghanistan if we wouldn't of gone into Iraq.

 

[BlindBoo]

Depends on how you define victory.

Boo we are done
Iraq has asked us to leave
we have republic in place
no more issues with weapons there
Saddam is gone
I dont know, sounds like the troops did there job to me

Iraq asked us to leave long ago.

There is now an Islamic Republic aligned with Iran in place now. It is unstable. The Civil war is still going on even though the US MSM ignores it.

The accusation of huge stockpile of newly manufactored WMD or the facilities used to make them were never found because they did not exist in 2003. Without which makes this a US led war of Aggression.

The removal of Saddam was not worth the life of one US soldier.