1
   

Top 10 myths of the Iraq war

 
 
Reply Fri 2 Feb, 2007 12:14 pm
http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/topten/articles/20070128.aspx



January 28, 2007: Top 10 Myths of the Iraq War. In no particular order. There are more, but ten is a manageable number.


1-No Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). Several hundred chemical weapons were found, and Saddam had all his WMD scientists and technicians ready. Just end the sanctions and add money, and the weapons would be back in production within a year. At the time of the invasion, all intelligence agencies, world-wide, believed Saddam still had a functioning WMD program. Saddam had shut them down because of the cost, but created the illusion that the program was still operating in order to fool the Iranians. The Iranians wanted revenge on Saddam because of the Iraq invasion of Iran in 1980, and the eight year war that followed.


2-The 2003 Invasion was Illegal. Only according to some in the UN. By that standard, the invasion of Kosovo and bombing of Serbia in 1999 was also illegal. Saddam was already at war with the U.S. and Britain, because Iraq had not carried out the terms of the 1991 ceasefire, and was trying to shoot down coalition aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone.


3-Sanctions were working. The sanctions worked for Saddam, not for Iraq. Saddam used the sanctions as an excuse to punish the Shia majority for their 1991 uprising, and help prevent a new one. The "Oil For Food" program was corrupted with the help of bribed UN officials, and mass media outlets that believed Iraqi propaganda. Saddam was waiting out the sanctions, and bribing France, Russia and China, with promises of oil contracts and debt repayments, to convince the UN to lift the sanctions.


4-Overthrowing Saddam Only Helped Iran. Of course, and this was supposed to make Iran more approachable and open to negotiations. With the Iraqi "threat" gone, it was believed that Iran might lose its radical ways and behave. Iran got worse as a supporter of terrorism and developer of WMD. Irans clerical dictatorship did not want a democracy next door. The ancient struggle between the Iranians and Arabs was brought to the surface, and the UN became more active in dealing with problems caused by pro-terrorist government of Iran. As a result of this, the Iranian police state has faced more internal dissent. From inside Iran, Iraq does not look like an Iranian victory.


5-The Invasion Was a Failure. Saddam's police state was overthrown and a democracy established, which was the objective of the operation. Peace did not ensue because Saddam's supporters, the Sunni Arab minority, were not willing to deal with majority rule, and war crimes trials. A terror campaign followed. Few expected the Sunni Arabs to be so stupid. There's a lesson to be learned there.


6-The Invasion Helped Al Qaeda. Compared to what? Al Qaeda was a growing movement before 2003, and before 2001. But after the Iraq invasion, and especially the Sunni Arab terrorism, al Qaeda fell in popularity throughout the Moslem world. Arab countries cracked down on al Qaeda operations more than ever before. Without the Iraq invasion, al Qaeda would still have safe havens all over the Arab world.


7-Iraq Is In A State of Civil War. Then so was Britain when the IRA was active, and so is Spain today because ETA is still active. Both IRA and ETA are terrorist organizations based on ethnic identity. India also has tribal separatist rebels who are quite active. That's not considered a civil war. This is all about partisans playing with labels for political ends, not accurately describing a terror campaign.


8-Iraqis Were Better Off Under Saddam. Most Iraqis disagree. Check election results and opinion polls. Reporters tend to ask Iraqi Sunni Arabs this question, but they were the only ones who benefited from Saddams rule.


9-The Iraq War Caused Islamic Terrorism to Increase in Europe. The Moslem unrest in Europe was there before 2001, and 2003. Interviews of Islamic radicals in Europe reveals that the hatred is not motivated by Iraq, but by daily encounters with hostile natives. Blaming Islamic terrorism on Iraq is another attempt to avoid dealing with a homegrown problem.


10- The War in Iraq is Lost. By what measure? Saddam and his Baath party are out of power. There is a democratically elected government. Part of the Sunni Arab minority continues to support terror attacks, in an attempt to restore the Sunni Arab dictatorship. In response, extremist Shia Arabs formed vigilante death squads to expel all Sunni Arabs. Given the history of democracy in the Middle East, Iraq is working through its problems. Otherwise, one is to believe that the Arabs are incapable of democracy and only a tyrant like Saddam can make Iraqi "work." If democracy were easy, the Arab states would all have it. There are problems, and solutions have to be found and implemented. That takes time, but Americans have, since the 18th century, grown weary of wars after three years. If the war goes on longer, the politicians have to scramble to survive the bad press and opinion polls. Opposition politicians take advantage of the situation, but this has nothing to do with Iraq, and everything to do with local politics in the United States.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 3,066 • Replies: 48
No top replies

 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Feb, 2007 12:01 am
@Drnaline,
Excellent source .
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Feb, 2007 07:43 am
@Drnaline,
Thanks Curmy, yeah the site is packed.
I was hoping someone would come in and try and debunk some of it buy i guess not.
0 Replies
 
Dmizer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Feb, 2007 11:07 am
@Drnaline,
response to Myth #1: I agree with this statement. Also we know he had WMD because The US supplied a good bit of the weapons when Iraq was fighting Iran. There was never any evidence that they were destroyed.
Response to Myth #2: How many resolutions were passed against Saddam? How many did he ignore? Not only was it legal, but it was a little late in happening in my opinnion.
response to Myth #3: Sanctions? you call them sanctions? The sanctions had holes in them so large you could drive an oil freighter through them.
Myth #4: Iran was definitely emboldened by the overthrow of Iraq. They felt that if they could gain control of Iraq by proxy that they would gain a strangle hold on the region. Remains to be seen if they are successful. Personally I wouldn't mind the US taking a few pot shots across Iran bow if you know what I mean, to scare them straight.
Myth #5: Planning for the post invasion was poor. Rumsfeld screwed the pooch on this one. He strangled his commanders and security forces with poor decisions. Why do you think so many of the retired Generals who served under him openly criticized him. He was the wrong choice for this operation. With Rummy gone we are on the right track again.
Myth #6 I don't even think Al-Qaeda thought we would have hit back as hard as we did after 911. Iraq didn't benefit Al-Qaeda, if anything it diluted there leadership pool. How many of their top dogs have we killed or captured now?
Myth #7 Iraq in a civil war? It would be alot less worrisome if the press stopped blowing the situation out of proportion. It's the old saying... "if you keep telling people something, over and over, eventually they will believe it"
If there were riots in New york City and people were setting off bombs, would you say that all of America was in a civil war? The problems in Iraq are only occuring in certain areas. Thats it, the rest if iraq is peacefully rebuilding.
Myth#8 : Press is at it again. I must say they are so good at skewing the information to fit thier agenda. Their hatred of Bush runs so deep that they are willing empower the enemy with their propaganda. Nothing keeps a Jihadist fighting like telling him he is doing well and the Infidels are losing.
Myth#9: I agree with this statement. Europe has has this problem coming for a long time.
Myth#10: Actually from my information sources, the tide is slowly starting to turn. We were hard up against it for a while there, but we are makeing progress in Iraq on the intelligence front. Which is where the batlle will be won. The press will never report any of this, but you can read between the lines. Everytime an agent for Iran is discovered, everytime they capture or kill an al_qaeda boss, the intelligence gains are displayed.
0 Replies
 
Professor Chaos
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Feb, 2007 12:45 pm
@Drnaline,
Wow! What a load of silliness. I don't see too much of a point in "debunking" total nonsense based on some blogger's opinion. Since it's such a load of crap, he doesn't bother with silly notions such as "facts" or "evidence."
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Feb, 2007 07:51 pm
@Professor Chaos,
Professor Chaos;10338 wrote:
Wow! What a load of silliness. I don't see too much of a point in "debunking" total nonsense based on some blogger's opinion. Since it's such a load of crap, he doesn't bother with silly notions such as "facts" or "evidence."
About the same load as your post.
I don't think you could debunk anything even if you wanted too. Since it's a load of crap it inspired you to post so it must be worth some crap?
0 Replies
 
Tulip cv
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Feb, 2007 08:11 pm
@Drnaline,
Thank Dr., really good...the issues and various opinions are confusing to the point where you just don't know what to think, but this reasonates truth.
0 Replies
 
GoneResistance
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2007 10:47 pm
@Drnaline,
I'll do you all a favor and debunk some of this.
1-No Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). You obviously have never taken the time to read the UNMOVIC reports. 2006 Summary There were no WMDs we didn't know about. There were no WMD's operational in 2003. Not "all" intelligence agencies at the time believed Saddam was a threat. George Tenet, the director of CIA did not believe Iraq was a real threat. I guess you don't consider CIA intelligence?

2. The 2003 Invasion was Illegal. Well, since Congress never declared War as required in the Constitution (Article 1 Section 8), and since we overran and now occupy another nation, I would say yes, it was illegal. Perhaps you don't consider the Constitution "legal" any longer, so violating it does not bother you?

4. Iran got worse as a supporter of terrorism and developer of WMD. Total nonsense. What WMD has Iran developed? What terrorism does Iran support in a much "worse" fashion than it did pre-2003? Iran is not a police state. You're really putting your ignorance on display with this one.

5-The Invasion Was a Failure. Saddam's police state was overthrown and a democracy established, which was the objective of the operation. That's funny, because according to the Joint Resolution to Authorize Use of Force the "objectives" were only: 1. To defend the national security of the United States 2. To enforce UN resolutions. There was nothing mentioned about overthrowing Saddam or establishing a democracy.

6-The Invasion Helped Al Qaeda. Once again, according to you, American Intelligence agencies are not a reliable source of information.
Karen DeYoung, Washington Post wrote:
A 30-page National Intelligence Estimate completed in April cites the "centrality" of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and the insurgency that has followed, as the leading inspiration for new Islamic extremist networks and cells that are united by little more than an anti-Western agenda. Rather than contributing to eventual victory in the global counterterrorism struggle, it concludes that the situation in Iraq has worsened the U.S. position, according to officials familiar with the classified document.


7-Iraq Is In A State of Civil War. Then so was Britain when the IRA was active, and so is Spain today because ETA is still active.
Show me one month, any month in any year, where casualties from IRA fighting or ERA fighting numbered in the thousands. In Iraq, the fighting is killing thousands every single month.

8-Iraqis Were Better Off Under Saddam. Most Iraqis disagree. Check election results and opinion polls. Reporters tend to ask Iraqi Sunni Arabs this question

Checked a Poll
Quote:
90 per cent of respondents think the situation in their country was better before the U.S.-led invasion.
2,000 adult Iraqis were polled in Baghdad, Anbar, and Najaf. Najaf is predominantly Shia, Baghdad is a mixture of Shia, Christian, Sunni.

I wonder if you just copied and pasted your arguments from Sean Hannity's blog or if you actually came up with these on your own.
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2007 10:57 pm
@Drnaline,
Quote:
I wonder if you just copied and pasted your arguments from Sean Hannity's blog or if you actually came up with these on your own.
See the link at the top of the first post? Answer your question?
0 Replies
 
GoneResistance
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2007 10:59 pm
@Drnaline,
You might be interested to know the original name of the military endeavor was
Operation
Iraqi
Liberation

Huh...I wonder why they changed it? It seems so appropriate, even in hindsight..
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2007 11:05 pm
@Drnaline,
When you can't come up with anything better, time to change the subject?
0 Replies
 
GoneResistance
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2007 11:08 pm
@Drnaline,
Can't come up with anything better? LOL I posted facts, evidence that refuted nearly every one of your "10 myths" in regards to this war.

Here's a myth for you: President Bush and Mitt Romney have both claimed our invasion was necessary because Iraq would not allow UN weapons inspectors to come in. That's pretty funny, considering Hans Blix was in charge of the UN inspections IN IRAQ.

You haven't refuted one single thing I have posted. You're just full of hot air, like so many of the balloons dotting the New Mexican horizon....how enchanting.
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2007 11:17 pm
@Drnaline,
I don't have to refute anything, you haven't debunked ****, just opinion?
0 Replies
 
Tulip cv
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2007 08:28 am
@Drnaline,
Quote:
You haven't refuted one single thing I have posted. You're just full of hot air, like so many of the balloons dotting the New Mexican horizon....how enchanting.


That's funny!

Here is the one and only revelant point that this situation is born of a lack of awareness and allowing fear to control behaviour.

It always begins this way, it will exist for all long as human beings fail to focus on what is important in life and give power and meaning to that which is negative.

It is all a choice, just as this discussion of anaylising the ignorance of the masses is a choice. Even this discussion is giving more energy to the situation.

We need to become emotionally attached to a solution, rather then the problem. With an emotional attachment we can visualize what peace and prosperity will look like, and then move forward in a positive way to help the world to accomplish this.

This is the only solution and it needs to start with the way you, personally, see things.

jennifernoble.lifesuccessconsultant.com
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2007 08:33 am
@Drnaline,
Wassup Tulip, nice to hear from you. Would the .com be yours?
0 Replies
 
GoneResistance
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2007 08:59 am
@Drnaline,
I haven't debunked anything?
You posted an article claiming ten things are "myths." I gave documented proof that 8 of those 10 positions are false.

"Sweet dreams and flying machines lay in pieces on the ground."
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2007 09:30 am
@Drnaline,
"Documentation proof" would require links, got any?
0 Replies
 
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2007 09:33 am
@Professor Chaos,
Professor Chaos;10338 wrote:
Wow! What a load of silliness. I don't see too much of a point in "debunking" total nonsense based on some blogger's opinion. Since it's such a load of crap, he doesn't bother with silly notions such as "facts" or "evidence."


You and the rest of your liberal buds don't care about 'facts'. Your minds are made up. You simply loathe America right now, and want to see everything she's ever fought and stood for, go down in flames. Well, I've got good news for you. Someday's going down in flames, alright, and it's YOU and YOUR HORDE OF GROUPIES. Get some.

"I looked to the sky, and what did I see? A whole bunch of badass PARATROOPERS landing on me.":wtf: :rocketwhore:
0 Replies
 
GoneResistance
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2007 09:49 am
@Drnaline,
Those words that are underlined in my post are links.
0 Replies
 
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jun, 2007 09:55 am
@Drnaline,
everything you posted is true

but the bedrock of the defeatist attitude is laid with the disregard of logic, and always putting into play their favorite card...

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c174/Silverchild79/card.jpg
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Top 10 myths of the Iraq war
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 01:38:30