Hagel on the Iraq War

[Minister_of_Information]

gatorev, that sounds dangerously close to advocating the neoconservative point of view.

Which I endorse.

[gatorev12]

Originally Posted by Minister_of_Information

gatorev, that sounds dangerously close to advocating the neoconservative point of view.

Which I endorse.

There are parts of it I do endorse...and from certain angles, one can certainly see sound strategy (even victory) involved too.

But the high human cost has dampened my enthusiasm of the overall affair. I never deployed to Iraq and didn't know anyone who passed away there--but many of my former colleagues did deploy and did witness close friends and colleagues go down. Talking with other veterans and hearing those stories makes me question if there weren't other ways of achieving the same thing.

Because it's certainly undoubted that there were numerous failures along the way and many strategic mistakes.

[Minister_of_Information]

The neoconservative project is a fundamentally antitotalitarian project which is naturally going to arouse my sympathy as a patriot, so I tend to cut it some slack. It never promised anyone a rose garden, but it was hoped that getting rid of totalitarian regimes when and where possible would gradually improve the world, and I find that line of reasoning to be sound. Yes there are costs, and they are terrible, but I can't find an alternative that leads to a more desirable outcome. Either we believe our founding creed or we do not, and either we are willing to confront evil, or we are not. Saddam's regime was going to continue indefinitely without intervention, and his removal was justified by every standard save Chomsky's many times over. I'm fairly certain that the average Iraqi prefers the uncertain future they are faced with now over their totalitarian -- even dystopian -- past. Note that gratitude towards or sympathy with the US is not required.

[co_gator89]

So you're ok with the notion of American blood being spilt so Mrs. Mohammed can vote? Because I'm not. Neoconservatism is dangerous and thankfully it's adherents have been discredited over the last decade.

“America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She well knows that by enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standards of freedom.” -John Quincy Adams

[HALLGATOR]

Originally Posted by Minister_of_Information

The neoconservative project is a fundamentally antitotalitarian project which is naturally going to arouse my sympathy as a patriot, so I tend to cut it some slack. It never promised anyone a rose garden, but it was hoped that getting rid of totalitarian regimes when and where possible would gradually improve the world, and I find that line of reasoning to be sound. Yes there are costs, and they are terrible, but I can't find an alternative that leads to a more desirable outcome. Either we believe our founding creed or we do not, and either we are willing to confront evil, or we are not. Saddam's regime was going to continue indefinitely without intervention, and his removal was justified by every standard save Chomsky's many times over. I'm fairly certain that the average Iraqi prefers the uncertain future they are faced with now over their totalitarian -- even dystopian -- past. Note that gratitude towards or sympathy with the US is not required.

You don't have to answer this question but I can't help but wonder if you have a son or sons old enough to be killed in one of these wars. If you say you do then I will agree you have a perspective on it but if you don't then I will add it is hard to understand what you don't have in this regard.

[vertigo0923]

i tend to agree with john q. adam's position, posted above. and up til last monday i certainly did have a son serving. it's over for me. no more fear and sleepless nights while he's in afghanistan. or talking to a tearful wife, who's just missing him, but lives two hours earlier in a different time zone (cali). if you have a son, or a spouse, or brother....old enough, or one that has served in the past, and who's departures caused you much panic, and i'm sure it sucked worse for them, anyhow, you will find yourself 'anti war' unless 'attacked'. end of story.

[Minister_of_Information]

Originally Posted by co_gator89

So you're ok with the notion of American blood being spilt so Mrs. Mohammed can vote? Because I'm not. Neoconservatism is dangerous and thankfully it's adherents have been discredited over the last decade.

“America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She well knows that by enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standards of freedom.” -John Quincy Adams

Totalitarian regimes are cankers, blights on the human spirit that hold future wars inside them like pus. Given your avatar I'd expect you to appreciate that.

[ChartsandGrafs]

Originally Posted by Minister_of_Information

The neoconservative project is a fundamentally antitotalitarian project which is naturally going to arouse my sympathy as a patriot, so I tend to cut it some slack. It never promised anyone a rose garden, but it was hoped that getting rid of totalitarian regimes when and where possible would gradually improve the world, and I find that line of reasoning to be sound.

You mean, this was merely the justification given to the public for the neoconservative agenda in the Middle East. Spreading fake "freedom" and non-existent "democracy" is always the cover story used for these types of military adventures, and like many Americans, you swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.

What I find interesting about you is, as far as government justifications for gun control are concerned, you are 100% B.S. resistant. You can cut through that nonsense like a laser through hot garbage. But when it comes to government justifications for empire building and aggressive warfare abroad, you seem completely paralyzed and incapable of critical, independent thought. You believe whatever they tell you without question.

How does that work?

[gatorev12]

Originally Posted by vertigo0923

i tend to agree with john q. adam's position, posted above. and up til last monday i certainly did have a son serving. it's over for me. no more fear and sleepless nights while he's in afghanistan. or talking to a tearful wife, who's just missing him, but lives two hours earlier in a different time zone (cali). if you have a son, or a spouse, or brother....old enough, or one that has served in the past, and who's departures caused you much panic, and i'm sure it sucked worse for them, anyhow, you will find yourself 'anti war' unless 'attacked'. end of story.

Well vert, you're, of course, entitled to your own opinion (moreso than most even given your sacrifices--and yes, those on the home front-the family and friends-serve just as much as those in the military) and I certainly won't speak ill of it.

But while there are many things I question from time to time about the tactical and strategic goals we've employed in current and past wars, I'm enough of a humanist to want our country to stand up for the ideals upon which we were founded. It's impractical and impossible to expect us to do so in every occasion and everywhere--but it's a worthwhile pursuit in many (if not most) instances. I don't claim to speak for all veterans and/or current military personnel, but it's certainly been my anecdotal experience to say that many in the military feel very similar.

France and the UK are both countries we could emulate a bit better in that regard--they're both certainly very active diplomatically and militarily in various regions around the world, but pick and choose their battles and the extent of their involvement a bit better than we do.

[Minister_of_Information]

Originally Posted by HALLGATOR

You don't have to answer this question but I can't help but wonder if you have a son or sons old enough to be killed in one of these wars. If you say you do then I will agree you have a perspective on it but if you don't then I will add it is hard to understand what you don't have in this regard.

No I do not have children of any age. Feel free to use that information in any way you see fit.

I have some news for you all. Every single one of us is going to die. And that right soon. Death is not the worst thing that can happen to a person. And I think that most people, when they are pushed into a personal awareness of their own mortality, are at least capable of courage.

I do not will that anyone's sons die, but nor do I believe that devotion to principle is the source of all misery and suffering on earth. I do not know who made war, but war exists and it isn't going anywhere anytime soon. And until it does go we are going to have to make choices and strategize about the future. And that will entail placing sons and daughters in harm's way.

If saying that makes me the bad guy, I am willing to be the bad guy.

[gatorev12]

Originally Posted by ChartsandGrafs

What I find interesting about you is, as far as government justifications for gun control are concerned, you are 100% B.S. resistant. You can cut through that nonsense like a laser through hot garbage. But when it comes to government justifications for empire building and aggressive warfare abroad, you seem completely paralyzed and incapable of critical, independent thought. You believe whatever they tell you without question.

How does that work?

...as if you're capable of any critical, independent thought involving any narrative involving a massive, world-wide conspiracy involving a multitude of dastardly, super-human villains--most of which involve the Disney Corporation and their elite cartoon assassins/super-agents.

[Minister_of_Information]

Originally Posted by ChartsandGrafs

You mean, this was merely the justification given to the public for the neoconservative agenda in the Middle East. Spreading fake "freedom" and non-existent "democracy" is always the cover story used for these types of military adventures, and like many Americans, you swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.

What I find interesting about you is, as far as government justifications for gun control are concerned, you are 100% B.S. resistant. You can cut through that nonsense like a laser through hot garbage. But when it comes to government justifications for empire building and aggressive warfare abroad, you seem completely paralyzed and incapable of critical, independent thought. You believe whatever they tell you without question.

How does that work?

You seem to have difficulty accepting the necessity of the modern state, at least for the time being. I'm not saying that it can't be changed, eventually, but until it does we must deal in reality.

[ChartsandGrafs]

Originally Posted by Minister_of_Information

You seem to have difficulty accepting the necessity of the modern state, at least for the time being. I'm not saying that it can't be changed, eventually, but until it does we must deal in reality.

What reality is that? The one in which the same government that lies to you about their reasons for gun control and other highly questionable domestic policies is all of a sudden truthful about their foreign policies?

"Yeah, we want to tyrannically restrict your access to firearms so you have no ability to resist a tyrannical government here at home, but we're fighting that war in the Middle East to protect people from tyranny. You believe us, don't you? Of course you do."

Seriously, what kind of mental gymnastics do you have to perform to make this obviously ridiculous narrative believable?

[Minister_of_Information]

We fight wars because they serve our interests, and yes sometimes that includes wars of liberation and prevention.

[HALLGATOR]

Originally Posted by Minister_of_Information

No I do not have children of any age. Feel free to use that information in any way you see fit.

I have some news for you all. Every single one of us is going to die. And that right soon. Death is not the worst thing that can happen to a person. And I think that most people, when they are pushed into a personal awareness of their own mortality, are at least capable of courage.

I do not will that anyone's sons die, but nor do I believe that devotion to principle is the source of all misery and suffering on earth. I do not know who made war, but war exists and it isn't going anywhere anytime soon. And until it does go we are going to have to make choices and strategize about the future. And that will entail placing sons and daughters in harm's way.

If saying that makes me the bad guy, I am willing to be the bad guy.

It's quite easy to treat death as a philosophical endeavor when we are sitting behind a keyboard. However death is really real and no amount of poetic waxing takes anything away from that. I also believe it is quite easy to sit behind a keyboard and talk about death when the death is not our own. Sending others into situations where they may forfeit their lives is the greatest responsibility our elected officials have in my opinion. All too often I find them extremely wanting in that regard and I also find those who love to push them in that direction wanting as well.

You can have devotion to principal and still not be ready to jump into the closest military conflict because it looks good on paper or someone says there is good cause for it. That war exists is a given. That we all too often are ready to bring it into existence is also a given. Personally I believe we should expend as much or more effort in avoiding war as we do in embracing it.

[gatorev12]

Originally Posted by ChartsandGrafs

Seriously, what kind of mental gymnastics do you have to perform to make this obviously ridiculous narrative believable?

I'm sure you could give us all some pointers on the mental process needed to ignore facts, reason, and any semblance of logic in 90% of the ridiculous posts you troll away with.

For someone so wedded to the idea of "asking questions"--you seem completely unwilling to answer any questions directed at you or your utterly ridiculous narratives. ie: if you can't defend your own arguments, you're obviously haven't put much thought into questioning your own narrative and accept it on blind faith.

So really, me calling you a troll is actually a compliment since I'm assuming you're doing this for entertainment or other attention-seeking purposes and not actually believing any of the ridiculousness you espouse.

[vertigo0923]

Originally Posted by HALLGATOR

It's quite easy to treat death as a philosophical endeavor when we are sitting behind a keyboard. However death is really real and no amount of poetic waxing takes anything away from that. I also believe it is quite easy to sit behind a keyboard and talk about death when the death is not our own. Sending others into situations where they may forfeit their lives is the greatest responsibility our elected officials have in my opinion. All too often I find them extremely wanting in that regard and I also find those who love to push them in that direction wanting as well.

You can have devotion to principal and still not be ready to jump into the closest military conflict because it looks good on paper or someone says there is good cause for it. That war exists is a given. That we all too often are ready to bring it into existence is also a given. Personally I believe we should expend as much or more effort in avoiding war as we do in embracing it.

this.

[ChartsandGrafs]

Originally Posted by Minister_of_Information

We fight wars because they serve our interests, and yes sometimes that includes wars of liberation and prevention.

Correction: We fight wars because it serves the interests of the ruling oligarchy and their banks and corporations. Liberation and prevention have absolutely nothing to do with it, either.

Don't take it from me, though. Here's a link to Smedley Butler's War is a Racket. Read and learn:

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.pdf

[ChartsandGrafs]

Originally Posted by gatorev12

I'm sure you could give us all some pointers on the mental process needed to ignore facts, reason, and any semblance of logic in 90% of the ridiculous posts you troll away with.

For someone so wedded to the idea of "asking questions"--you seem completely unwilling to answer any questions directed at you or your utterly ridiculous narratives. ie: if you can't defend your own arguments, you're obviously haven't put much thought into questioning your own narrative and accept it on blind faith.

So really, me calling you a troll is actually a compliment since I'm assuming you're doing this for entertainment or other attention-seeking purposes and not actually believing any of the ridiculousness you espouse.

When did you become such a victim?

[AmericaFirst]

Originally Posted by Minister_of_Information

gatorev, that sounds dangerously close to advocating the neoconservative point of view.

Which I endorse.

So you endorse the policy of being Israel's slave and fighting nonstop wars around the world at all times?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism