Support the war in Iraq? Great! Your country needs you!

Politics International Politics
61

Well, when it comes to the abuse, heap away, because I am in this with Bush for the long haul (my support even though some may find that woefully short of actual military presence). I fully expected a long-term open-ended commitment akin to those given to Japan, Korea and Germany among others and I frequently if not endlessly mentioned 60 years from the very start pre-invasion in 2002.

Unfortunately, this commitment is coming together with a lot of violence. IF this surge does not work out (and I think that we should try) then I am all for pulling back to remote desert bases and letting the Iraqis kill each other until they get good and sick of it.

No one can fault us for removing Saddam. No one can fault us for trying to bring a more civil form of governance to the Iraqis. There are so many coulda shoulda wouldas but what about the nonaction of the Europeans? Similar to their nonaction in Bosnia and Kosovo? and now their nonaction in Darfur? Somalia? Congo? and previously in Rwanda?

No matter what we do the US is going to get beat up by those whose narcissism and cynicism have made them so twisted that they would not recognize a moral act if it bit them on the leg.

The Iraqis have their chance. Perhaps, the very conditions and characteristics that make up the country mean that this violence is unavoidable. Let’s not forget that despite the “stability” provided by Saddam (if you think that all the wars he started and internal violence on a mass scale can be called stability) was responsible for a far greater number of deaths. Maybe as with any country, the people get the government that they deserve. I, however, am not that coldly cynical. I think that the spark has been lighted and we will have to see how far this goes. I do note, however, that the war in Algeria has petered out after approximately 8 years. That was about the amount of time it took the Kurds (now a bastion of stability) to stop fighting each other. Perhaps, that is the amount of time that we will need to wait for Iraq and its factions to sort themselves out. Unfortunate, but there you are. I, however, do not see how pulling out is in any way either possible or desirable. Our remote bases plan will do the trick but at a great humanitarian cost. It is a last resort fallback plan and one that I hope we never have to implement.

62

Do you consider the war in Iraq important enough to be worth dying for, jd?

63

The best answer is that our social compact should be tight enough that there is trust between the government and people about something as serious as war. While there may be many who signed up for the peacetime military on the idea that they would get money for college, get their own act together via discipline imposed from others, etc., this relationship of trust is far more important when you’re asking people to sign up when a state of war already exists.

Thus, many Americans were ready and willing to answer the call after 9/11 out of their trust of the government – Pat Tillman being the extraordinary example of a person walking away from millions of dollars and the prestige as a “sports hero” to become an actual hero, a person who sacrificed money and an actual career and then his life. But I suspect Tillman’s mood matched that of much of the country – having signed up for Afghanistan to fight al Qaeda, his writings to family members and comments to fellow soldiers directly reflect his anger and frustration about the Iraq invasion.

I think it’s more a matter of whether one thinks the government’s war-making powers are to be considered a solemn matter or not, and I haven’t seen any formal polls about this I think this is how most Americans talk and feel. It’s long been a principle of leadership, intellectual honesty and good manners that one doesn’t ask others to do things that oneself is unwilling to do. “Unable” is an entirely different matter – but the person unable to do so should be able to look himself in the mirror and say: “If I could, I would be there to risk my life beside them. I am sorry that I cannot.” If most GOPper supporters of this war can do this without giggling or crossing their fingers, I would be truly surprised.

But let’s take this to somewhere else for a moment – within our own homes, do we all save the nastiest household jobs purely for our own spouses or do we come up with some attempt to split the duties?

64

Let’s take this out of the hypothetical:

What I am wondering is if those of you who are on record as supporting this war plan to encourage your kids to sign up if America is still involved by the time they reach military age. Those of you with any relatives of military age, encouraging them to sign up? Why or why not?

65

Way to put him on the hot seat, spook. :thumbsup:

While you’re at it, JD, please also tell us whether you think that cancer research is important enough for you to quit your job and go be a medical researcher. Also, if you support manned space missions, why aren’t you willing to put your own life at risk and try to become an astronaut. And --last one on the “If you support the right of others to volunteer for duty that puts their own lives in danger then you should also want to go do that job yourself” theme-- if you supported Giuliani’s policies in New York City, kindly tell us why you did not go volunteer for the NYPD.

P.S. Don’t think that you will be off the hook if you manage to answer those questions either, because our next question will then be: [color=black] “Well, if you support the manned space progam and police departments and the armed forces and fire departments and hazardous mountain search&rescue teams etc, then why on earth are you not personally employed in all of these professions?” [/color]

Basically, spook and I want to know what kind of human being can look himself in the mirror knowing that he supports a government that allows its citizens to volunteer to risk their own lives in the course of their duties. How do you sleep at night? :astonished:

Oh yeah, and before you try it, don’t give us any of that “Yes, I support all those things, and naturally I also support the right of each individual to decide whether he/she wants to volunteer for them. At the current time, I wouldn’t support a government policy that forced anyone to do any of them.” BS :no-no:

66

We can if we don’t believe that the people behind this didn’t even want a relatively smooth transition to democracy. This was either a delibrate attempt to forment long term chaos or one of the worst military blunders in history. Generally speaking it would seem logical to have a plan for bringing stability back to a country once you have destabilized it, unless of course the plan really is to sell weaponary, inflate the price of oil and gain access to one of the world’s largest reserves. I was thinking about taking a year off to write poetry but I don’t know why I have to write everything twice. Twice. I don’t know why I have to write everything twice. Three times. I don’t know why I have to write everything three times and so on and on and on and on into infintauseum.

67

Way to put him on the hot seat, spook. :thumbsup:

While you’re at it, JD, please also tell us whether you think that cancer research is important enough for you to quit your job and go be a medical researcher. Also, if you support manned space missions, why aren’t you willing to put your own life at risk and try to become an astronaut. And --last one on the “If you support the right of others to volunteer for duty that puts their own lives in danger then you should also want to go do that job yourself” theme-- if you supported Giuliani’s policies in New York City, kindly tell us why you did not go volunteer for the NYPD.

P.S. Don’t think that you will be off the hook if you manage to answer those questions either, because our next question will then be: [color=black] “Well, if you support the manned space progam and police departments and the armed forces and fire departments and hazardous mountain search&rescue teams etc, then why on earth are you not personally employed in all of these professions?” [/color]

Basically, spook and I want to know what kind of human being can look himself in the mirror knowing that he supports a government that allows its citizens to volunteer to risk their own lives in the course of their duties. How do you sleep at night? :astonished:

Oh yeah, and before you try it, don’t give us any of that “Yes, I support all those things, and naturally I also support the right of each individual to decide whether he/she wants to volunteer for them. At the current time, I wouldn’t support a government policy that forced anyone to do any of them.” BS :no-no:[/quote]

How about you, Hobbes? Do you consider the war in Iraq important enough to be worth your life or the life of someone close to you?

68

The best answer is that our social compact should be tight enough that there is trust between the government and people about something as serious as war. While there may be many who signed up for the peacetime military on the idea that they would get money for college, get their own act together via discipline imposed from others, etc., this relationship of trust is far more important when you’re asking people to sign up when a state of war already exists.[/quote]

I think we agree here, MFGR.

Lets assume that most young people signed up on the conditions that:

-----(a)----- they would only be fighting if our national security was truly being advanced by the conflict;

-----(b)----- they would be told the truth about why they were going; and

-----(c)----- they would be given proper support, equipment etc.

Now let’s assume that none of conditions (a), (b), or (c) exists with respect to the Iraq war.

Under these assumptions I think you and I would be in complete agreement that the “they volunteered” argument goes right out the window. Because they were lied to, and they are not risking their lives for what they volunteered for. I’d even go further than that and say that under these assumptions what was done to the troops would be wrong no matter what (i.e. the fact that someone may be willing to serve himself would not make what had been done to the troops right).

To me, this is why it all comes down to “Do you agree with this particular war/how it was sold/how it has been carried out?” (your point about trust between government and people comes in here, I think).

If, on the other hand, conditions (a), (b) and (c) had all been met, then I would be back to asking how military service differs from police service (in which people volunteer for duty which may involve them killing, or being killed), and I would wonder how someone like spook could possibly vote for a measure to hire more police unless he was willing to go be a cop himself.

:idunno: It’s just hard to believe that most people genuinely have a problem with individuals in society volunteering to perform different roles, or that anyone would be asking the “Why don’t you go enlist yourself?” question if the military action itself were deemed to be justified/important. In other words, I think people’s real criticism here is with this conflict and how it has been handled from beginning to end, and not with the fact that not every able-bodied member of society chooses the military as a profession.

69

If a war is “worth” the deaths of thousands of your fellow countrymen and tens of thousands of innocent civilians but not worth that level of sacrifice on any personal basis then you have to question the moral basis for such a war.

Is it really a just, unavoidable war of national self-defense or really a craven act of opportunism by a self-serving minority?

70

That’s right Spook! And all our clever and long-winded efforts to explain our justifications for supporting this war are really so much nonsense. Apparently, we are not smart enough to fool you as to our real reasons and you see right through us! Damn! I hope others are not as smart as you. I don’t want this to influence public opinion. Oh shit! Too late! Gosh. Now, what are we (I) going to do?

71

:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

Except most Iranians and other arabs.

Since Bush Snr didnt get the job done and left Bush Jnr comes in and makes a complete fuckup.

Should have left Iraq alone.

It’s about the economy stupid!!! ( the oily one that is )

72

[quote=“rock spider at large”]
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

Except most Iranians and other arabs.[/quote]

Iranians and “other arabs” eh?

Fascinating. I suppose one could ask… :ponder:

Nah, nevermind. Sounds like Rock Spider has a deep understanding of these things, and has the issue well in hand. Carry on…

73

Way to put him on the hot seat, spook. :thumbsup:
[/quote]

I don’t mind this question Hobbes, because the answer is obvious. Yes, I do think it is in the USA’s best national interests to be more heavily involved in the Middle East. We’ve done dollar diplomacy and been rewarded with the embargo of the 1970s; we’ve done the “support the bastard in charge” scenerio, ie: the enemy of my enemy is my friend and been rewarded with Saddam; we’ve played nicey nice with the Saudis and been rewarded with their not so covert attempts to turn the ME into a hard lined Islamic region, NOT to mention their continued attempts to “convert” the black prison population in the US to Wahhibist Islam.

So, the question is again, “Do I consider this war important enough for young men and women to go out, fight and possibly die for?”

Yes. Yes I do. And when I was in the USMC, I would have gone where they sent me and done what they asked me to do, because that was my job. I expect, no, I demand the same out of our troops. I do not demand the same from armchair soldiers shooting off their mouths, including myself and the aging Fred Smith. A soldier’s job is to go where he’s told and do what he’s told, NOT to muse on geopolitical events and ethical questions FAR beyond their comprehension.

I will state again that this ENTIRE line of discussion is intellectually morbid, as the people suggesting the mouthy youths go fight actualy want them to go and get killed in order to prove their point, that war is “bad” or that this war is “wrong.”

Why we are there is bigger than Saddam’s death or his brother in law’s head popping off. It is about a volitile region of this monkey trodden rock being run by Cadbury nutbars who rule their ignorant masses with a self serving line by line revisonist view of the Koran.

Fight this war now, or fight it later.

I say, do the tough stuff first.

Spook, I am SO with you on the disgusting nature of war, but I am so against the belief, held by Jaboney (and possibly you as well) that “we” are somehow “better” than this.

I know we’re not. We are smart monkeys. And smart monkeys fling poo too sometimes.

74

So it’s worth dying for, just not personally. No rush to get the kids or younger brother enlisted or anything like that. And no thinking on the part of the prospective soldiers either, no “hmmm, this is the stupidest war effort ever, maybe I’d rather pump gas in Detroit…”

75

[quote=“Hobbes”]Now let’s assume that none of conditions (a), (b), or (c) exists with respect to the Iraq war.

Under these assumptions I think you and I would be in complete agreement that the “they volunteered” argument goes right out the window. Because they were lied to, and they are not risking their lives for what they volunteered for. I’d even go further than that and say that under these assumptions what was done to the troops would be wrong no matter what (i.e. the fact that someone may be willing to serve himself would not make what had been done to the troops right).[/quote]

The people who are in the military before war are stuck with it. Individuals in the military can choose, at some considerable personal risk, to not carry out orders that are against the law and can be caught between a rock and a hard place where the lines are drawn fine. However suffice it to say that those who joined before the war are more or less stuck because the issues they would be looking at are the micro-picture (OK for me to shoot these particular people now?) versus macro picture (am I part of violating international law somehow?).

Those who signed up for the Afghanistan war in the post-9/11 recruitment rush may have reasons to gripe when they were sent to Iraq instead. These guys would parallel the situation of Pat Tillman, the Arizona Cardinals player who gave it all up to fight in the Army Rangers.

However, the failure to adhere to a, b, and c become acute when one gets to follow-up recruitment to replace the dead, wounded, retired and otherwise mustered-out. When you’re asking people to sign up, the pitch becomes mighty lame when the subtext to all the rah-rah college-money talk is that you’re headed to a war that fails a, b and c.

Any able-bodied American citizen who strongly believes in the Iraq War should not hesitate to sign up for it. Now, with the war having descended into being a quagmire, of course there are a lot of people who championed the launching of a war of aggression into Iraq who might be getting second thoughts. If so, now’s a great time to put the cards on the table.

If everybody here think the war in Iraq is not worth fighting personally (whether they’re physically able, within the expanded age limts, etc. doesn’t matter in this), it would be good to know. However, I saw those two 20-something, able-bodied “counter protestors” at Rockefeller Center offer up the lamest of excuses I’ve ever seen. If yelling at a bunch of grandmas qualifies as “service,” then I think its no wonder the hardcore Bush fans have lost touch with America’s heartland. But it would be good to know what holds people back.

a) I would not fight in any war because
a1) I am a pacifist and would not support any war by participating in it
a2) I am a pacifist but would be willing to serve as a corpsman or Red Cross/Red Crescent volunteer to alleviate war’s suffering for others
a2) I prefer to cheerlead other “chumps” to their deaths while derriding the patriotism of those who don’t agree with me

b) I would not volunteer to fight in any war but would serve if drafted
c) I would not volunteer to fight in a “bad” war (“bad” = aimless, not benefitting national security, etc.)
d) I would volunteer to fight in a good war but won’t if the odds are stronger that I’ll be sent to the bad war instead
e) I would fight in any war America is engaged in
f) I hope America gets into new wars and am looking to put foot to foreign ass

76

bob, please don’t be idiotic. I’m 39 years old, way out of shape, back problems, anklyosing spondelitus, my feet and toes swell up after a brisk walk; would you WANT me there spearheading an assault? Besides that, I’m categorized as a Disabled American Veteran, and I receive a monthly check for 100 bucks. They wouldn’t take me back if I wanted them to.

I wouldn’t rush anyone into the service, because it’s not my place. It’s not an easy life and there are many things to complain about, however some people get a lot out of being in the service. And nearly EVERY male and female member of my immediate family has served in the military, so I don’t see that you have a point to make.

Soldiers fight wars. Even Canada has an army. WTF are you guys doing in Afghanistan? And why don’t you bitch about that from time to time?

You may think this is the stupidist war ever, and that’s fine by me. I disagree, but clearly that’s not fine with you.

77

I’m sorry jd perhaps I’m dialectic. :laughing: Laughing at my own jokes now even. Honestly I talk about Iraq because it is an important issue and what everybody else is talking about these days. Also I need the occassional break from translating song lyrics. Four bloody days I been at this… damn.

note: It is sort of like a home work assignment. I set myself the challenge of really understanding the argument and then poking holes in the side you seem, unfortunately, to be on. It is nothing personal. I just like to argue.

78

Yep.

Nice to go abroad and be killed by your own troops.

Very professional are our US military.

79

This is just not the way it usually works gents.

“Hi, I wanna sign up and go to Afghanistan, but HEY! I don’t wanna go to no Iraq because that war is morally and ethically bogus.”

“Sure thing kid, sign here.”

Well, the last part is pretty realistic, but the first part is not. You sign up. You choose the field that you want to go into. You go through basic training. Then you go through the training for your specific field. Then you are stationed. Then you are shipped out on manuevers or deployed somewhere.

You have absolutely NO CHOICE about where you will be deployed. The only thing you can be assured of, if you choose the infantry, is that in times of war, you will most likely be deployed into a combat zone.

80

jd – I agree with you 100% on this. As I indicated, they may gripe … as Pat Tillman did. But that’s all he can do. It’s not like you can then get out of the army. He clearly differentiated the two wars, as I think many Americans do.

Of course, once you’ve seen a few guys get stuck that way, people realize that their odds of carrying out some neoconmen’s oil fantasy war are far greater than the likelihood of being able to get some sort of licks in on the Taliban and OBL’s guys. My sense is that it does affect enlistment when there’s a failure in the social compact on wars – Americans were willing to sign up for World War I and II as volunteers but there’s been a breakdown in trust here that’s probably only increased because of our experience in Vietnam. That’s why I think that the Powell Doctrine test would have avoided much of our current trouble.