Do some of you still think all this is "worth it"?

[Terran]

I had quite an argument a few weeks ago with some folks here who insisted that all the death and destruction in Iraq was "worth it" if it helps us get rid of Bush next year.

I hope those of you who hold this view are still pleased with how things are going. And with yourselves.

Dirk

[wuushew]

1. Names? Links?

Such opinions cannot be had by more than 5% of all people on DU

[JanMichael]

3. Hell it's still going on.

Except now it the "Well I opposed going in but now that we're there we gots to finish the job" crowd.

[wuushew]

5. If the job is to rebuild the civilian infrastructure than I agree

Since a chaotic/warlord/islamist state with no functioning government or economy would be hard pressed to fix water purification systems.

The so called military mission is a farce however and I agree with DK 100% get the U.S. out and get the U.N. in.

[ComerPerro]

28. exactly

We NEED to finish the job...

As in... we need to get a new President who has the intelligence and dignity to apologize to the world, and ask for help to show, with UN forces, that we want to apologize to the Iraqi people and help them rebuild the infrastructure that we so precisely took out with our "shock and awe".

[Terran]

9. I'd rather not embarrass the people involved

If they want to chime in, they know who they are. One in particular was quite adamant about that viewpoint.

[Skittles]

15. LET ME KNOW WHO THEY ARE

I WANT TO KICK THEIR ASS.

[DUreader]

2. I'm glad I missed these threads, Didn't Albright say the same

"It was worth it..."?

[BadFaith]

12. That was about the sanctions....

It was her initial reaction to a U.N. report stating that the sanctions against Iraq was complicit in the deaths of a half a million Iraqi children. She latered apologized for the comment.

[DUreader]

13. Thankyou, BF, I missed the apology, I'd like to read it, link?

Or if you could direct me where to search for it?

[DrWeird]

4. Plenty of people think it was worth it to get rid of Saddam.

who's better?

[Terran]

10. The answer is,

Neither is better. Both are equally repugnant. Enough people have died in Iraq this year for ten Saddams.

[nostamj]

20. got rid of Saddam?

really?

got a link?

i thought bushco was now floating the idea that SH is being the current attacks.... :shrug:

[Military Brat]

26. Who says we've gotten rid of him?

And there's plenty more where he came from. Getting rid of Saddam is the sorriest excuse the bushies came up with to cover up their real agenda, and the Iraqis know it.

Now let's get rid of that bastard president of Uzbekistan, who boils people alive. Oops. Can't do it yet. Need him for that Afghanistan travesty that was supposed to get rid of ... what was his name? Oh, yes. Osama bush forgot-him.

[shanti]

6. hell no

never did, never will. get U.S out of iraq NOW!

[DuctapeFatwa]

7. 9 out of 10 KBR investors say "You bet!"

I personally don't think it is worth it, but I don't own any KBR and I don't have bunker access.

[izzie]

8. It may be worth it if you are sitting 8000 miles away.

and you never lived in a city that was blown up and seen people in your family killed and torn apart.

[Terran]

11. That, in effect, was my take on it too.

The only way to hold such a morally bankrupt position is if you have nothing at all personally at stake. As long as you can bring yourself not to care about anyone else, then it's all hunky-dory.

[Resistance Is Futile]

14. Too soon to tell

A hundred million deaths would be 'worth it' if that's what it takes to drive the fascist pigs from office.

If the fascists stay in office then the death toll was just a waste of human life.

[Terran]

16. I can't assume you're kidding

as I once would have. So you're serious? A hundred million people could be sacrificed to rid us of Bush? Maybe I'm clueless--tell me you're not serious.

[Resistance Is Futile]

22. I am entirely serious

The fascist agenda--which goes far beyond idiotboy--will kill many hundreds of millions if left unchecked. They will die from war, famine, disease and the grinding mass poverty that fascists idolize. No price is to high to pay to prevent the fascists from 'liberating' the world as they have done to Chile, Iraq, Iran, and many other countries.

[Terran]

23. Good thinking

"It became necessary to destroy ourselves in order to save us."

(to paraphrase a bit)

I hope you're including yourself and every single person you hold dear in that 100,000,000 people. No exceptions, right? And while you're at it, every *thing* you hold dear goes too.

[Resistance Is Futile]

24. Everything is expendable

Defeating fascism has become an issue for the survival and advancement of the species. If the current global wave of fascism is not halted, global dictatorship is inevitable and the collapse of civilization is quite possible. People like Blair and the idiot king must be stopped regardless of the cost.

[Terran]

32. I wouldn't care to be a survivor in your future

Your outlook make you as bad as they are.

[Darranar]

17. I think I have an idea of what you're talking about...

and you're greatly exxagerating it.

[Terran]

18. No

It was primarily one person--in that sense I have exaggerated--but others were chiming in on his side. I am not exaggerating, however, the words of the person making the core argument. He was 100% for whatever happens in Iraq, because it will help us get rid of Bush. This person is very precise with words, and it was impossible to mistake him.

[Darranar]

19. That makes me even more certain...

that I know who you're talking about.

[Terran]

21. OK, if you know who I'm talking about

would you care to clarify his position then? Perhaps I misunderstood him, even though we discussed it fairly extensively.

My argument is simple--no one should have had to lose their life to make George Bush look bad. I want to be rid of him as much as anyone here, but I can't countenance what the US has done in Iraq, to the Iraqi people, and to our own soldiers and their families, merely because it may help us get rid of Bush. I understood him to say that all the death so far was a fait accompli and there was nothing to be done about it, so we should be grateful that it will all make Bush look bad. I'm sorry, I find that a morally bankrupt viewpoint.

[9215]

25. Here is the way I see it

The death and destruction are going to happen anyway, the only thing positive to come of it is if the blame is put squarely where it belongs: on Bush. What would be a real mess is if the UN or other countries start trying to "help out" in Iraq and Bush managed, as I am sure he would work very hard to do, shift the responsibility onto a third party.
I can hear the freepers now:

"Look, see the UN is a basket case, they can't do shit right in Iraq....blah, blah."

There is no winning this thing, there is only defeat and disaster and it needs to go down as a case study in how stupid the pre-emptive strike doctrine is, not to mention how going into a war on false pretenses with nefarious motives and against the popular will of the international community leads to defeat.

Some people call it treason to suggest that the US needs to be defeated in Iraq, but IMO it does, or it will never learn that you simply cannot do such things. A fraud should not be rewarded with success.

We have to find another way doing things, alternatives to oil, etc., and we must find out what happened on 9/11 go into Saudi Arabia and bring the REAL bastards who are behind terrorism to justice. The only way I see a chance of this happening is if the BFEE and its public and private power base is destroyed.

At all costs Bush must be held to account for Iraq. No amount of help or effort can make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

[Military Brat]

27. No amount of help or effort can make a silk purse ...

... out of a sow's ear.

The same thing can be said for your argument. Sorry. As intelligent as you are, please come up with a more viable position. And I'm not being facetious. We had enough martyrs in Vietnam. No lessons were learned.

[9215]

30. Ok, but first

tell me what part of my take you disagree with. Or, more specifically how is it not viable?

[mmonk]

29. Not worth it

Not one life. Some I think are a little too partisan.

[KG]

31. more sick justifications for mass murder eh?

not like i haven't read a lifetimes worth just on DU. :puke:

[TEXASYANKEE]

33. What??

I would not trade the life of one single serviceperson or innocent civilian's in exchange for defeating Bush in next year's election. We could have (and still will) defeated Bush in next year's election without going into Iraq. No, there is no scenario by which I would feel that any soldier's death was "worth it" regarding Bush.

[camero]

34. A Phyric victory

I don't think so. It will get Bush out of office but at great cost to the credibility of our country which will take quite a bit of time to get back.

P.S I now the subject is spelled wrong, please correct.