archive2009-14.pdxradio.com » Politics and other things

Mitt Romney: All US fought for in Iraq could vanish

(63 posts)

  1. Andrew
    Member

    Mitt thinks "all US fought for" could vanish in Iraq:

    http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2023838332_apxgop2016romney.html

    The question is, what does he think we were "fighting for?"

    What do you think we were "fighting for" in Iraq? Should we still be there, fighting for it?

    Posted on June 13, 2014 - 06:52 PM #
  2. Valerie ring
    Member

    It's sad Andrew but I think it's quite evident that over 4,000 U.S. soldiers died because of the U.S. demand for oil.

    Posted on June 13, 2014 - 07:21 PM #
  3. Andrew
    Member

    I think Iraq was two wars: the one we started and won easily and then the one that started against us after we won the first one.

    We invaded Iraq for several reasons. I do believe Bush and Cheney had wanted to invade all along and were simply looking for an excuse. Obviously access to oil (or keeping Iraq as a stable world supplier of oil) was one big reason. Bush's family history was another. I do think worry about WMDs was real just highly overblown and not a legitimate reason to invade all on its own.

    After the first war ended (I mean 2003 not 1991), "what we were fighting for" was basically to clean up the big mess we had created by invading. We ended up with a Shi'a-dominated government that has largely shut out Sunni and Kurdish participation. So it should be foolhardy to expect peace in Iraq. I don't know if you can ever say we made amends for the some 100,000 Iraqis that were killed (and thousands more injured, displaced, etc.) as a result of Bush and Cheney's arrogance, but we clearly can't force them to stop hating each other over there. What else can we do at this point to make it up to them? Sending more Americans to fight and die on the Shi'a side doesn't seem right, especially if that means we might be fighting on the same side as Iran.

    Posted on June 13, 2014 - 07:51 PM #
  4. HD
    Member

    Ignored by the left is the obvious. This administration could both save innocents and prevent terror attacks here without putting boots on the ground.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/11/iraq-wants-america-back-to-fight-al-qaeda-with-air-strikes.html

    But by doing little else but thumb twiddling and blaming Bush, the bad guys are now taking command of weaponry, planning their strategies against the US and killing civilians. Evil doers should be stopped, or at least slowed down until this administration gets its act together.

    Posted on June 13, 2014 - 09:05 PM #
  5. Andrew
    Member

    Herb, what do you think the US was fighting for in Iraq? Please try answering the question.

    Posted on June 13, 2014 - 09:19 PM #
  6. HD
    Member

    There wasn't one reason.

    National security, oil, defending innocents and our friends.

    http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/the-opportunity-in-iraq/

    Posted on June 13, 2014 - 09:22 PM #
  7. Chris_taylor
    Member

    And the Weapons of Mass Destruction, Herb?

    Posted on June 13, 2014 - 09:35 PM #
  8. duxrule
    Member

    "There wasn't one reason.

    National security, oil, defending innocents and our friends.

    http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/the-opportunity-in-iraq/"

    The last bastion of the O'Hater faithful, Worst News Daily. All is lost when you have to start quoting Yousef Farah. Give it up, Herb.

    Posted on June 13, 2014 - 09:40 PM #
  9. Andrew
    Member

    Our "friends?" What "friends" did we have in Iraq?

    Did invading Iraq make our national security worse or better?

    Posted on June 13, 2014 - 09:47 PM #
  10. NoParty
    Member

    Herb?

    WMD's????

    Herb?

    Posted on June 13, 2014 - 10:01 PM #