| Author |
|
Greg Reeves
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 06 February 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1396
|
| Posted: 23 July 2008 at 10:36am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
Can I just say how much I'm tired of people talking about the "Surge" on the talkshows? That Obama made a "huge error in judgment" by opposing it? We're the most powerful nation in the world; a surge anywhere will slow violence for a time. The problem is that we never should have been there in the first place, which was Obama's initial statement. So there's less violence there in the last few months... was it worth 600 billion dollars?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Geoff Gibson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5744
|
| Posted: 23 July 2008 at 10:44am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
I agree we never should have started the war but how is that a useful answer to the question about our continued involvement in Iraq? We are there now we have a moral obligation to the people of that country to try to make it a better place. Eventhough I think we never should have been there, once you do it you cannot unring a bell. Whether we should have gone to war or not is now a question for historians. The question for voters is: how do we extricate ourseleves from this war while not making the situation in Iraq worse than we found it?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Mike O'Brien
Byrne Robotics Member
Official JB Historian
Joined: 18 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 10927
|
| Posted: 23 July 2008 at 10:59am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
"We are there now we have a moral obligation to the people of that country to try to make it a better place."
But by destroying it? I'm not suggesting that's your platform, but I don't think we can fix what we did to those poor people by keeping soldiers there.
There are other options.
This is the era of "think differently". That's what we need in Iraq.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Greg Reeves
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 06 February 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1396
|
| Posted: 23 July 2008 at 11:02am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
[responding to Geoff] Sure, I just mean that people are trying to blast Obama for a "guess" on what effect the surge would have, conveniently avoiding the fact that a majority of Americans feel we should never have gone to Iraq and should get out now. By the way, the argument could be made that we created the mess there. I'm glad Saddam and his sons are gone, but he had a level of control over the populace that makes current situations there look like all-out chaos by way of comparison. All proponents of the war there seem to like to predict the future of an America that pulls out of there too quickly. We don't know what will happen; they have a democratic government now, they have a police force/militia. I think it's far more likely that insurgent violence will stop when the invading/occupying force is gone. Think about what would happen if some foreign power was capable of occupying a piece of America: don't think that every American who owns a gun wouldn't instantly become an "insurgent" (a type of person that very easily gets the title of "terrorist").
Edited by Greg Reeves on 23 July 2008 at 11:03am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Geoff Gibson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5744
|
| Posted: 23 July 2008 at 11:14am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
But by destroying it? I'm not suggesting that's your platform, but I don't think we can fix what we did to those poor people by keeping soldiers there.
There are other options.
I think the editorial by Friedman I linked above sums up much of my thinking, Mike. We should withdraw and have some form of a time table, but a time table thats flexible given the needs of the Iraqi government and the situation on "the ground."
Greg:
We agree, basically, I think. My point is if Obama wants to tout he was right on the war (vis a vis not going in) he should admit that the surge worked and he was wrong on that. Thats why its relevant. Obama played the "I never wanted this war" card throughout the primaries. Recent history indicates that his decision there was spot on, but I don't think the majority of american opposed the idea of the war in the lead up to the war. So Obama "guessed" right there. Likewise recent history indicates that the surge (which he opposed) was the right decision. So he "guessed" wrong there. The war was wrong, the surge has worked, what do we do now? Thats the question.
It goes for McCain too --- he was wrong on supporting the war, right on the surge -- what does he want to do next? Thats the question for him.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Scott Richards
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 22 September 2005
Posts: 1258
|
| Posted: 23 July 2008 at 12:00pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
I agree we never should have started the war but how is that a useful answer to the question about our continued involvement in Iraq? We are there now we have a moral obligation to the people of that country to try to make it a better place. Eventhough I think we never should have been there, once you do it you cannot unring a bell. Whether we should have gone to war or not is now a question for historians. The question for voters is: how do we extricate ourseleves from this war while not making the situation in Iraq worse than we found it?
That's it in a nutshell and that's what I don't think Obama gets. There is no question that the war was wrong. There is no question that we shouldn't have gone in. Hindsight is 20/20. I don't want a President who's all about hindsight. I want someone with foresight.
Edited by Scott Richards on 23 July 2008 at 12:00pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Joe Zhang
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12843
|
| Posted: 23 July 2008 at 12:04pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
Our moral obligation to Iraq is war reparations (which will never happen.) We had no right to go in there.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Al Cook
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 December 2004
Posts: 12735
|
| Posted: 23 July 2008 at 12:11pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
QUOTE:
| I want someone with foresight. |
|
|
Like voting against a war that was based on falsified/erroneous information
and shoved down the populace's throats?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Mike O'Brien
Byrne Robotics Member
Official JB Historian
Joined: 18 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 10927
|
| Posted: 23 July 2008 at 12:14pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
That's a bad talking point, Scott - Obama had the foresight to be against the war before it even started. He's not like McCain and Hillary, who were for the war then against it - he had foresight.
Nice to see you continue to try any angle against Obama, but that one is just factually wrong.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Geoff Gibson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5744
|
| Posted: 23 July 2008 at 12:34pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Mike:
When was McCain against the war? He's been a pretty steadfast supporter (I am hesitant to use the term Hawk but others may).
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Mike O'Brien
Byrne Robotics Member
Official JB Historian
Joined: 18 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 10927
|
| Posted: 23 July 2008 at 12:44pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
He's not - but as long as we're playing fast and free with facts to make points, I figure, why not?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Geoff Gibson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5744
|
| Posted: 23 July 2008 at 1:00pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
but as long as we're playing fast and free with facts to make points, I figure, why not?
Mike! This is not TeeVee news!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Topic Closed)
