It's Iraq All Over Again!

[The Doctor.]

The resemblance is 'Creepy' and like 'Deja-vu'!

Just like Saddam Hussein was Bombing his own people in real-time.

Just like the UN Voted to take direct action in Iraq.

Just like a think tank with members in the administration pre-planned an Iraq invasion.

Just like sending the 70,000 ground troops into Iraq.

Just like the way thousands of Iraqis begged us to intervene in their heated battle with Saddam's forces.

Just like Iraq! In every way!

:sarcasm:

:rant:

[CountAllVotes]

1. your are just now figuring this out?

War is evil and it is never "right".

:kick:

[The Doctor.]

8. That the left is as willing to create false parity

as the right?

Yeah, it's kind of dawning on me lately.

War is never 'good', but it can be 'just'.

[LiberalEsto]

2. W. left his old script in a drawer

in the Oval office.

[The Doctor.]

5. You're kidding, right?

How is the 'the same' as Iraq except by that it's military action and Ghaddafi is a dictator?

Where are the rest of the similarities?

[The_Casual_Observer]

3. Time will tell if your sarcasm will turn to sorrow & regret.

If the past is any window into the future, there will be some regret.

[The Doctor.]

4. There always is.

The ridiculous attempts at creating parity here are demonstrably weak, however.

[Union Scribe]

7. For chickenhawks? Shit, they never lose anything, why should they care?

They just move on to the next rah-rah bombing.

[leftstreet]

6. Well, at least we don't have to listen to Rumsfeld

He was so annoying

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

10. Well, at least Rummy knew what he knew

and maybe knew what he didn't know
but maybe didn't know what he didn't know
and surely didn't know what he didn't know what he knew
He was always speaking clearly.

:hi:

[leftstreet]

13. "around Tikrit & Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat"

:banghead:

:hi:

[sad sally]

18. The current Sec of Defense sure gives us a lot of confidence

that he also knows what he knew or that he thought he knew when he said getting into another Middle East conflict would mean one's head needed to be examined.

Yeah, yeah, I know he said a LAND ARMY and that was decipherd to mean the US needed to spend more on ships and aircraft instead of tanks and artillary (like we're using up right now, so will need to be replaced). Still...

"The strategic rationale for swift-moving expeditionary forces, be they Army or Marines, airborne infantry or special operations, is self-evident given the likelihood of counterterrorism, rapid reaction, disaster response, or stability or security force assistance missions. But in my opinion, any future defense secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should “have his head examined,” as General MacArthur so delicately put it.

By no means am I suggesting that the U.S. Army will – or should – turn into a Victorian nation-building constabulary – designed to chase guerrillas, build schools, or sip tea. But as the prospects for another head-on clash of large mechanized land armies seem less likely, the Army will be increasingly challenged to justify the number, size, and cost of its heavy formations to those in the leadership of the Pentagon, and on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, who ultimately make policy and set budgets."

[Marblehead]

9. they don't call

it theater for nothing

[inenemyterritory]

11. we have no business being there!!

k+r

[The Doctor.]

12. That's a valid opinion.

Very fair.

[jefferson_dem]

14. Either that ... or Vietnam...

Which is just like every other conflict since 1965. All. The. Same. Or something.

[PurityOfEssence]

15. Yes, some who oppose this point out similarities, thus if it isn't exact, all opponents are fools

whether they use that analogy or not. Quite clear.

Once again, the amateur experts bark puerile cries that it's all very simple and obvious and rage at any obstacle to their righteous cause.

There are similarities to Iraq, but it's hardly the same, and many of us haven't relied on the comparison to point out the dangers and the immorality of the incursion. Just because some do claim that it's exactly the same doesn't "prove" that opposition to your stance is all groundless.

We clear now?

[The Doctor.]

19. Huh? Are you being deliberately abstruse?

You've made your subjects unclear, and I don't like to guess to which 'side' you are assigning values.

- I never said that opposition to the no-fly zone is groundless.
- My stance is that there are virtually no similarities between Iraq and Libya.
- That stance is grounded very solidly in facts.
- The suggestion that there are significant similarities to justify opposition to the no-fly zone is utterly without grounds.
- Those who disagree, and insist that 'Libya is Iraq all over again', are wrong not because they disagree, but because the situation is demonstrably different in many, many ways more than it is similar.

[MannyGoldstein]

16. It's fairly close to the Northern Iraq no-fly operation after the first Gulf War

"History doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes"
- Mark Twain

Bottom line, to my mind, is we really don't know that the alternative to Gaddafi will be better (and it's unlikely that there will be an alternative in the near future), or how we extract ourselves from this, and thisngs never go as expected in war. It's possible that our intervention will be helpful, but unlikely.

[The Doctor.]

20. I don't recall our invading during the life of that no-fly zone...

until we made up a reason to, that is.

I image we will extract ourselves by having the pilots fly back to bases and carriers. Now, if for some reason this escalates, then we can start to worry about 'commitment'.

[MannyGoldstein]

21. I don't recall that as being short term, or ending well

Are you saying that we didn't invade until we did?

These things have a way of creeping in scope - as it did in Iraq, Serbia, etc.

[The Doctor.]

23. It wasn't the no-fly zone that led to the invasion of Iraq.

It was the PNAC agenda.

We knew even then what the neo-cons wanted. There is no counterpart today.

I'm not saying it can't happen, but Iraq happened for very different reasons.

[EFerrari]

17. The salient point isn't that this is Iraq but that we are still the United States. n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. Yep. Full of (allegedly) good intentions backed by missles. Too bad about the millions of dead.

Of course, we were (and are) "protecting" them.

[The Doctor.]

25. Wow. What does it take to live and opine without information?

I'd ask you for a link showing how the no-fly zones over Iraq led to the deaths of 'millions'.

...But you don't have one.

I'd like to see how it was that the no-fly zones over Iraq caused the execution of the PNAC-planned invasion.

... But you have nothing.

I'd love to know that the Libyans, just like the Iraqis, weren't praying that we'd intervene.

... But again, you have no clue, likely deliberately so, that this situation is entirely different from Iraq in nearly every fundamental way except two;

- Our military, bad dictator. Everything else is situationally different.

Exercise deliberate ignorance if you wish, there's not much I can do about that as my experience with wingnuts and fundies has proven.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

27. Due to your obvious lack reading comprehension, and history, I'll leave you to stew.

Get back to me when you improve those lacks enough to open a few history books about our previous interventions in civil wars and how beneficial they were for the victims of our good deeds. Millions of them.

[The Doctor.]

28. So, somehow you think that ignoring what I've said and being vague on specifics makes you right.

Glad you think that works for you.

Like I said; If you want to believe bullshit despite the facts, there's nothing much I can say.

Believe what you want.

[The Doctor.]

30. Well...

That's a non-sequitor Steph.

Could you embellish on that a bit?

[Baclava]

22. Can't be Iraq - we have Arab countries in the "Coalition of the Willing' this time.

Wait...are they still with us?

[The Doctor.]

26. Cute. You're going to have to add a few things... like, the 'UN'...

And that there is a legal resolution. Add that the rest of the world doesn't oppose action as it rightly did over the illegal and unprovoked invasion of Iraq. Also add that the Bush administration had to blatantly lie to justify the action. (not happening now buddy.) Consider also that this, unless you are very out of touch with reality, is not any more of an invasion than when Clinton (The 42nd President) supported the no-fly zone but, ummm... didn't invade.

But it's not like Ghaddafi is *currently* bombing the fuck out of his own people, right?

Oh, wait... he IS!

The list goes on for pages. (See; "PNAC")

I'm sorry, but I just can't tolerate dealing with this level of deliberate ignorance tonight.

Much as I like you, if you think this is like Iraq, you really haven't thought this through at all.

At ALL.

[Baclava]

31. War is war to me - filling the skies with bombs and missles is what I call war

(cue the dramatic music)

(cut-to-scene)

Green glowing tee-vee screen of anti-aircraft tracer fire over a beseiged capital city...

(wave the banners)


B-2 stealth bombers taking out hardened aircraft shelters....check

Bombing airfields and cratering runways....check

Blowing up SAM missle sites....check

Blowing up AAA batteries....check

Blowing up command and control bunkers....check

Shock and awe....check


Political niceties aside, what we have here is an old fashioned Air War.


Boots on the ground is over-rated when we can rain down over 150+ Tomahawk cruise missles.

[The Doctor.]

32. That's a reasonable position. Iraq=Libya is not.

That's the entirety of my point here.

[Baclava]

33. Sorry. I do get carried away. Caffeine is a helluva drug.

Carry on.

[killbotfactory]

29. Fuck 'em, we're hypocrits.

That means we can't do anything, ever, even if it's warranted. Cuz, you know, oil n shit.