Glenn Beck: ‘Liberals, You Were Right,’ We Should Never Have Gone into Iraq

Forums: Politics, Iraq, War
Email this Topic • Print this Page

http://static01.mediaite.com/med/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/glenn_beck_contrite.jpg

Glenn Beck: ‘Liberals, You Were Right,’ We Should Never Have Gone into Iraq
by Andrew Kirell | 5:59 pm, June 17th, 2014 video

Glenn Beck led off his radio show on Tuesday morning with a stirring monologue about all the ways he believes the left and right can come together to “heal” America. As part of that, Beck suggested that perhaps all Americans can come together to recognize the blunder that was invading and occupying Iraq in 2003 — an act that he now regrets having supported.

After listing the Veterans Affairs Department scandal and the fight against Common Core standards as two ways in which the left and right can unite, Beck asserted that “maybe we could come together now on this nightmare in Iraq.”

He then took a contrite tone and admitted [emphasis ours]:

From the beginning, most people on the left were against going into Iraq. I wasn’t. At the time I believed that the United States was under threat from Saddam Hussein. I really truly believed that Saddam Hussein was funding terrorists. We knew that. He was funding the terrorists in Hamas. We knew that he was giving money. We could track that. We knew he hated us. We knew that without a shadow of a doubt. It wasn’t much or a stretch to believe that he would fund a terror strike against us, especially since he would say that. So I took him at his word.

[...] Now, in spite of the things I felt at the time when we went into war, liberals said: We shouldn’t get involved. We shouldn’t nation-build. And there was no indication the people of Iraq had the will to be free. I thought that was insulting at the time. Everybody wants to be free. They said we couldn’t force freedom on people. Let me lead with my mistakes. You are right. Liberals, you were right. We shouldn’t have.

He went on to declare that “You cannot force democracy on the Iraqis or anybody else,” largely because “If people vote for Sharia Law, they vote for Sharia Law.” Considering how many hundreds of thousands of lives, and trillions of dollars spent on the war, Beck put forward the idea that maybe we should never have gone in the first place.

-RELATED: Glenn Beck Takes on Ann Coulter for Calling Libertarians ‘Pussies’

“I have more of a chance of hacking off my loyal listeners and audience by saying this,” he conceded, “but so be it: Not one more life. Not one more life. Not one more dollar, not one more airplane, not one more bullet, not one more Marine, not one more arm or leg or eye. Not one more.”

For his conclusion, Beck said that Republicans need to listen to their non-interventionist instincts before “politicizing” Iraq and supporting another military action simply because of politics — i.e., because the president is a Democrat. “This has to become about the principles because in the principles we all agree,” he ended. “Enough is enough. Bring them home, period.”

Watch below, via TheBlazeTV:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/glenn-beck-liberals-you-were-right-we-should-never-have-gone-into-iraq/#ooid=93NGVjbjo0raDOtZnXY_HM5SIgTHeCSf

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 8 • Views: 5,734 • Replies: 61

@bobsal u1553115,

well, I might say that, despite his appearance of sincerity, his ratings have been tumbling so maybe he needed something really "whocking"

It like sports talk radio hosts. They really don't give a **** about ports, they only want their boards lit up. They usually only get that when they announce that (xxxx, XXXXXXX) the favorite running back of the Turd SLingers is GAY.
Then the boards lite up.

0 Replies

@bobsal u1553115,

I do not accept Beck's position. (He has never been my favorite guy.)

I am grateful to W for overthrowing Saddam.
His father shud have done it; a 2nd war shud not have been necessary,
but better late than never.

When I lived in an American port city,
I was concerned that Saddam 'd buy some small nukes
from half starving Russian scientists (or army officers)
and slip in some nukes on us, approaching port cities on little boats.
We knew that Saddam was a homicidal maniac with a grudge against us, for Kuwait.

I advocated overthrowing Saddam, running an election,
and then getting the hell out of there.

David

0 Replies

Where is the evidence that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the United States? Where were the much-feared "weapons of mass destruction"? Remember when Hussein served as a U.S. proxy against Iran in the early 1980s?

http://photos1.blogger.com/x/blogger2/1935/2455/400/371576/rumsfeld_hussein.jpg

Ah, such sweet memories!

By the way, Kuwait once was part of Iraq. I don't know all the history; but the division seems to have been artificial, not natural.

Are the Iraqi Christians and Jews who lived under Saddam better off today, or have they been subjected to sectarian violence since Iraq's "liberation"? How about the social status of Iraqi women? Hasn't there also been a regression regarding the rights of women in Iraq?

If the powers that be in Washington (whether Democrat or Republican) continue to invade other countries hither and yon, we'll bankrupt ourselves for sure. Not to mention wasting the lives of human beings, both civilian and soldier.

Discuss (if you're so inclined). I'm outta here!

2 Replies

@wmwcjr,

wmwcjr wrote:

Where is the evidence that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the United States?

It was the possibility,
the intolerable risk, that Saddam might buy some nukes
from naboring half starving Russian scientists (or army officers)
after the ignominious collapse of the USSR.

wmwcjr wrote:

Where were the much-feared "weapons of mass destruction"?

Thay were in Iraq until Saddam moved them
to the Bath Party of Syria, because W took so long to get the war going.

1 Reply

@wmwcjr,

wmwcjr wrote:

By the way, Kuwait once was part of Iraq.

By the way, America was once part of English real estate.
U think we need to give ourselves back, Bill?? Lemme know.

David

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

wmwcjr wrote:
Where is the evidence that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the United States?
It was the possibility,
the intolerable risk, that Saddam might buy some nukes
from naboring half starving Russian scientists (or army officers)
after the ignominious collapse of the USSR.

Where do you get that reason for the invasion of Iraq from? The US government didn't cite that as a reason for its invasion.

OmSigDAVID wrote:

wmwcjr wrote:
Where were the much-feared "weapons of mass destruction"?
Thay were in Iraq until Saddam moved them
to the Bath Party of Syria, because W took so long to get the war going.

Where do you get this assertion from? The surveys that were conducted after the invasion concluded that Saddam had ended his nuclear program in 1991, destroyed his chemical weapons stockpile in that selfsame year, and abandoned his biological weapons program in 1995.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

wmwcjr wrote:
Where is the evidence that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the United States?
It was the possibility,
the intolerable risk, that Saddam might buy some nukes
from naboring half starving Russian scientists (or army officers)
after the ignominious collapse of the USSR.

Where do you get that reason for the invasion of Iraq from?
The US government didn't cite that as a reason for its invasion.

OmSigDAVID wrote:
wmwcjr wrote:
Where were the much-feared "weapons of mass destruction"?
Thay were in Iraq until Saddam moved them
to the Bath Party of Syria, because W took so long to get the war going.

Where do you get this assertion from? The surveys that were conducted after the invasion concluded that Saddam had ended his nuclear program in 1991, destroyed his chemical weapons stockpile in that selfsame year, and abandoned his biological weapons program in 1995.

What happened is not controlled by what is CITED.

From the newspapers at the time.

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

From the newspapers at the time.

USA newspapers are government propaganda rags.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

wmwcjr wrote:
Where is the evidence that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the United States?
It was the possibility,
the intolerable risk, that Saddam might buy some nukes
from naboring half starving Russian scientists (or army officers)
after the ignominious collapse of the USSR.

Where do you get that reason for the invasion of Iraq from?
The US government didn't cite that as a reason for its invasion.

OmSigDAVID wrote:
wmwcjr wrote:
Where were the much-feared "weapons of mass destruction"?
Thay were in Iraq until Saddam moved them
to the Bath Party of Syria, because W took so long to get the war going.

Where do you get this assertion from? The surveys that were conducted after the invasion concluded that Saddam had ended his nuclear program in 1991, destroyed his chemical weapons stockpile in that selfsame year, and abandoned his biological weapons program in 1995.

What happened is not controlled by what is CITED.

From the newspapers at the time.

What happened isn't controlled by your speculations, either.

The newspapers were wrong.

1 Reply

It just might be that Glen Beck is a broken clock, right only twice a day and close at others, mostly wrong most of the time - but he is right about this.

0 Replies

I'll give Beck credit, he may not be the closed book I took him as, and his points are interesting, part ploy or not.

0 Replies

How come there is no talk about prosecuting the USA war criminals?

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

The newspapers were wrong.

So u know for a fact
that Saddam did not send his gas to the Bath Party in Syria??

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Yep. There was no gas to send to the Bath Party in Syria.

0 Replies

@bobsal u1553115,

Quote:

Glenn Beck: ‘Liberals, You Were Right,’

I didn't hear anyone say Beck was right about the Caliphate. He has been warning us about Islam for years.

Why can't progressives ever tell the whole truth?

3 Replies

@coldjoint,

Glen beck is like you, never right. It's only when he accepts a position on the left where he has a chance of being right.

Here's your chance to be right, cj. Go for it. It'll do your psyche a world of good.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

Glen beck is like you, never right.

What do you see in the Middle East. He was right, I am right, and anyone else who is not scared or in denial.

1 Reply

@coldjoint,

In the ME, everyone who isn't delusional sees an area totally fucked over and around by the USA. You have millions of people who hate the USA for its horrendous brutality and its thieving ways.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

area totally fucked over and around by Islam.

FIXT

1 Reply

Glenn Beck: ‘Liberals, You Were Right,’ We Should Never Have Gone into Iraq

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know