Iraq Anniversary: Any Lessons Learned?

It has been 10 years since the inception of Shock ‘n Awe and our cakewalk through Iraq. It was nice to have the Iraqi oil fields paying for the adventure.  And wasn’t it nice to have us greeted as liberators?  Surely we all can breathe a sigh of relief that we found and secured those WMD’s! No mushroom cloud as well!  Whew!

shocknawe

Hubris. Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld.

Patriotism. Flags. Cheers.  “USA! USA! USA!”

Idiots.

Advertisements

13 thoughts on “Iraq Anniversary: Any Lessons Learned?

  1. “PREEMPTIVE WAR” (emphasis mine)

    Now, lets see, Obama has been President going on five years. He still has troops on the ground in Afghanistan. Moreover, he is attacking Pakistan,
    Yemen, Sudan, and where else. Now, he is in Israel probably planning with
    Netanyahu possiblyattcking Iran. And, this morning, Sen Finstein is on saying it might be time for boots on the ground in Syria.. It seems to me, M_R, we have another war president….War is war!

      1. I see there is good war and bad war? How about illegal war? Tell me, is
        an Iraqi non-combatant citizen different that a citizen in Afghanistan or
        a Pakistani citizen or Sudan citizen or a Yemeni citizen? How about a
        Democratic President who is given a kill list and he makes the selection of who lives and who dies based on that they MAY be a threat to the U.S.
        in the future?

        1. Good, bad, legal and illegal. Are these the 4 types of war? Which type was the Civil War?

          At what point of engagement does one attach the word war to movements/killings/attacks? Was Granada under Reagan ‘war?’

          1. Of course it was…U.S. troops invaded a nation. Tell us, M_R, why you are having a tough time in calling Obama a war President?

              1. Yep, your above Post title is appropriate. Rose colored Glasses is how
                your viewing Obama!He has been at war five years already, and it looks
                like he is looking to get into Syria.

                As to war, I would say armed hostility in another country is a condition defining war…Obama is, therefore, at war.

  2. I received an e-mail from Lisa Simeone about this topic. She was irate that NPR fawningly interviewed Richard Perle.

    My response was “Why should that surprise you, Lisa? NPR is a totally different beast from what it was intended to be.

    OTH, the BBC ran this about how the intelligence for the Iraq invasion was fantasy.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01rh8hd

    I can only ask–how close is NPR to advocating War with Iran?”

    1. Thank you. Laci. We can always depend on the BBC to present a deep and meaningful analysis. NPR is an ‘also-ran’ in comparison.

      It is most painful to watch the war hawks spin their way out of their dreadful war-making plans and execution. We can only hope that The People have learned the correct story of this ghastly adventure and that it will mollify their desire to enter into another one [Iran].

        1. Neither am I. There is a miasmic sense of fear encapsulating a large swath of this nation and I would guess that a ‘unifying’ war might take the focus off of the fear [temporarily.]

  3. And, the war that you infer coming could easily be with Iran…over 70% of the population would accept a war against Iran if it continues to move
    toward nuclear bomb. However, mitigating against a war with Iran is the
    opposition of the generals, the war-weariness of the armed forces, the
    inability to raise many more troops than Iraq and Afghansitan required, and
    an empty treasury. However, the military-industrial complex wants it.

Comments are closed.