General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Onion Called It 12 Years Ago:
http://www.theonion.com/multiblogpost/this-war-will-destabilize-the-entire-mideast-regio-11534
liberal N proud
(60,336 posts)lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)bigwillq
(72,790 posts)And everyone else that voted for that mess.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Seems like many have, or have willfully blocked that part of the truth. Fans gotta fan, I guess.
tazkcmo
(7,300 posts)That voted for the IWR.
Orrex
(63,216 posts)And everyone who voted for HJR 64 or SJR 23 is culpable for the entire debacle that followed. The war in Iraq would have been much harder to sell if our respected agents in the House and Senate hadn't let their fear drive them to surrender their power to Bush.
Yes, certain members of Congress will now claim to have taken a courageous stance against Bush by voting no to the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, but by that time the fuse had already been lit. If they'd done their jobs on 9/14/2001, we'd be living in a very different world today.
pkdu
(3,977 posts)And She isn't Bernie....
cui bono
(19,926 posts)I can't find a no here:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2001/roll342.xml
Clinton is a "Yea" in the Senate:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00281
AnotherDreamWeaver
(2,850 posts)From: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=936
On September 14, 2001, Lee was the only member of Congress to vote against a resolution authorizing President Bush to use military force against anyone associated with the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The resolution passed 98-0 in the Senate, and 420-1 in the House.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Barbara Lee was the only House member who voted against Afghanistan involvement.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Someone else was trying to tell me Bernie voted for military force in Iraq before he voted against it, but what they provided was something that was for using military tribunals to bring Saddam to trial and get him out of power based on crimes against humanity. Not to invade to take him out of power.
tecelote
(5,122 posts)Intentional and highly profitable. The world be damned.
We need a new way to engage.
Complete military withdrawal from the middle east would be a good start. If there are concerns that we will be leaving good people to the whims of warlords, dictators and religious madmen, then we should offer diplomatic asylum to anyone from Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria or Libya who wants it and bring them the hell back with us.
We destroyed their countries, the least we could do is offer them ours to live in.
Longer term, the solution for the region would appear to be INDEPENDENT economic prosperity as a thriving Middle Class anywhere will eventually figure out that if the only thing they can't buy is a modern Government, they will build one FOR THEMSELVES.
sorechasm
(631 posts)How about we quit adding war fuel to the fire of those suffering?
PBO was right to call out those outrageous thug candidates who are afraid of homeless women and children displaced by our belligerent actions.
rpannier
(24,330 posts)with scores of people who remember the loved ones lost
BeanMusical
(4,389 posts)FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)Perhaps none of this was unintended by our masters.
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)And only really got pissed at us when we had troops in Saudi Arabia to fight Saddam Hussein the first time. We only did that because we helped prop him up. Of course we were only doing that because of the externally drawn lines on a map by France and Britain that made up the heart of the Middle East after the Ottoman empire fell. That only happened because...
The Middle East was stabilized by dictators in part because the modern day borders never made sense. These radical and extreme elements have been evolving and adapting for decades, even before Bush, the first Bush, or Reagan were in office. I know they're Republicans, and everything is their fault, but it really isn't that simple.
If any of this was as easy as just don't do this or that, all this stuff would've been solved like thousands of years ago.
Response to kpete (Original post)
IHateTheGOP This message was self-deleted by its author.
MynameisBlarney
(2,979 posts)That said pretty much the same thing around that time.
colsohlibgal
(5,275 posts)Just like Doofus Dubya Obama keeps creating a lot of "collateral" damage.....maybe 1 or 2 terrorists killed 2-5 or more created for the future. Bush is no kind of bright bulb but you would think Obama could grasp that math.
Response to colsohlibgal (Reply #13)
Post removed
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)Holy shit, man.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)On Thu Nov 19, 2015, 07:01 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
Collateral damage is what happens when people don't have the sense
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7362360
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
This is seriously offensive. Blaming victims for being killed or hurt via collateral damage should not be within DU Community Standards.
JURY RESULTS
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Nov 19, 2015, 07:11 PM, and the Jury voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Serious OTT. Hide
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This exposes the author as lacking real life experience to those who are trapped in economic desperation. Or maybe this author is just a troll who is attempting to hurt people. Either way I prefer to have them exposed for what they are instead of aiding them by concealing their activities.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't like the post but I'll let it stand.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: A shocking lack of empathy making it rude, offensive and over the top.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I see no personal attacks or an abuse of posting privileges. We can disagree with the poster, but as long as it is in a civil manner that adds discussion to a debate then I think it is ok.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)and obtuse post anywhere, much less here.
JanMichael
(24,890 posts)laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)JanMichael
(24,890 posts)laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)The WTF was reserved for that now-hidden post.
90-percent
(6,829 posts)"At last, our long national nightmare of peace and prosperity is finally over."
-90% Jimmy
heaven05
(18,124 posts)smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)moondust
(19,993 posts)which big rich country told them to fuck off when they desperately needed a safe harbor from the barrel bombs of a dictator and the torture and beheadings of a death cult?
underahedgerow
(1,232 posts)I didn't see bush dropping any bombs on Morocco, but maybe I missed that in the Friday news dump or something.
None of those freaks was from Iraq or Afghanistan or the middle east. They're of North African descent and lived their entire miserable lives within the EU, primarily BE and Paris. They went to syria to join their murderous pals and returned to commit their crimes.
These were thugs, lowlifes, drug dealers, drunks and thieves. They didn't follow Islam at all, and only stole it and looted it for their own beastly excuses for murdering, destroying and obliterating everything in their sight. They were not intelligent, they weren't masterminds. They failed at everything they did. They were unemployed, business failures, social misfits, social outcasts and failures. They represent and stood for nothing but the worst kind of violence and certainly not any religion on this planet.
They're also dead now, and the rest of their loser pals will be obliterated soon. These guys are all running for Iraq right now, heading for Mosul. It will be interesting to see will happen next. I hope the civilians that are left in Mosul have the sense to leave in a big fucking hurry.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)Have to justify our insane military budget somehow.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)John Foster (SoS) and Allen (CIA Director)
adopted the "mordant observation of Randolph Bourne as the Uited states plunged into the epic madness of World War I, "War is the health of the state." Foster, who always acted in the interests of the American establishment, understood this. It was the permanent war fever that empowered the country's political and military hierarchies and enriched the increasingly militarized corporate sector. tt was the very lifeblood of this ruling group's edxistence - even if, in the atomic age, it threatened the existence of humanity."
David Talbot, The Devil's Chessboard (2015) p. 247.
In other words, sit down and shut up, peasants, we have MONEY to make.
"
zentrum
(9,865 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)but it's timeless, to boot.
Truly America's Finest News Source.
A national treasure, it is.
Kablooie
(18,634 posts)That's why I screamed in my car when they announced the attack on Baghdad.
It was always obvious that attacking Iraq was wrong in so many ways.
The fact that Hillary ignored all this at the time really makes her priorities suspect.
Kablooie
(18,634 posts)That's why I screamed in my car when they announced the attack on Baghdad.
It was always obvious that attacking Iraq was wrong in so many ways.
The fact that Hillary ignored all this at the time really makes her priorities suspect.
raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)In a nation of heroes, only those horrified by war are cowards.
Bucky
(54,027 posts)But give President Trump enough time and I'm sure he can hit that goal.