President gave the address last night, and SECDEF Gates and VP Biden were in Iraq for the hand over ceremony this morning.

Speech wasn't bad in my view. Hit all the main points, and really emphasized the men and women who fought and died in Iraq. Even the most stonewall Obama critics can give him credit for those remarks about the troops. He said Iraq still has some ways to go, but is one the right path, and praised the military for bringing down the violence.

You could even tell there was a moment where the President almost lost it as you can see in his eyes and voice start to crack when he noted some of the sacrifices. This was a telling sign of the toll of being President and personally reading the reports and signing the letters to the fallen families.

The link between our current economic situation and the war's cost was interesting and the classic "guns vs. butter" debate.

Overall, I liked it and it was much, much better than his BP, oil spill speech.
Even Bill Kristol wrote it wasn't bad.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/note-my-fellow-hawks

It was his best speech in awhile. That being said, the bar isn't exactly high at this point.

believer;461633 wrote:But in all fairness this was hardly a "Bush-only" affair.

Completely agree. Bush got screwed over by people he trusted as far as intelligence went. Blaming him for making decisions that other people technically make by gathering intelligence isn't fair. Give me the information that, as far we know, he got and I am making the same decision.

Saddam needed, and most certainly deserved to die for the million messed up things he had done and was currently doing at the time.

And as far as a stable democracy in Iraq, hopefully the CIA is all over who wins and loses those 'democratic' elections as well. Heathens don't know how to run a country, we might as well aid our own interests in the region.

I'm pretty sure that both history and the yet unfolding events will show that W. started a phony war and cost this country dearly economically, produces a civil war there that makes the entire area another cesspool for generations to come and further creates more enemies for us than friends. One of the great fuck-ups of all time.

cinci for years this country played both sides of the fence in many world areas so to keep one country from getting a monopoly on power.thats why we helped iraq out in there war with iran.getting rid of saddam as bad as he was did iran a big favor making them the top dog in that region and getting rid of the guy they were afraid of.

wgh raider;468192 wrote:cinci for years this country played both sides of the fence in many world areas so to keep one country from getting a monopoly on power.thats why we helped iraq out in there war with iran.getting rid of saddam as bad as he was did iran a big favor making them the top dog in that region and getting rid of the guy they were afraid of.

So we should have looked the other way while one kook murderous despot kept a kook "freely-elected" Islamic president in check? Fighting fire with fire, eh?

Top people on BOTH sides of the political aisle reviewed the same intelligence and went public with their concerns about Saddam Hussein.

While it is true that for various reasons our nation's leadership (again on both sides of the aisle) have played unfortunate games with our foreign policy decisions, the fact remains that regardless of the political climate in Iran, the region if not the world is far better off without Saddam Hussein in the mix.

Paladin, In a sense I agree with your "phony war" claim, but only insofar as we should have gone after Bin Laden in Afghanistan and dealt with Saddam Hussein at a more appropriate time.

We could have handled the Afghan situation and had a solid chance at Bin Laden. We , however, took our eyes off the ball and played politics with a phony war. The minute W. started a phony war in Iraq, he ruined the deficit because he did not pay for either war as he cut taxes ( a real dumb azz move) and began killing wholesale numbers of innocents in Irag & Afghanistan. We'll have decades of enemies built just over that. The civil war may prove very costly as it will force Middle East countries to choose a side to back. The impact hits oil ( and its price) and alienates more Muslim countries aligned against us . Huge screw-up that cooks our goose for generations to come.

Paladin;468729 wrote:We could have handled the Afghan situation and had a solid chance at Bin Laden. We , however, took our eyes off the ball and played politics with a phony war. The minute W. started a phony war in Iraq, he ruined the deficit because he did not pay for either war as he cut taxes ( a real dumb azz move) and began killing wholesale numbers of innocents in Irag & Afghanistan. We'll have decades of enemies built just over that. The civil war may prove very costly as it will force Middle East countries to choose a side to back. The impact hits oil ( and its price) and alienates more Muslim countries aligned against us . Huge screw-up that cooks our goose for generations to come.

With all due respect man....are you even capable of typing without regurgitating the same stupid (mostly inaccurate) talking points?

"Victory" is rather defined in most conflicts. The problem is we had 'victory' once we toppled Sadam, which was the stated goal. Really, the past few years have been nothing more than an occupation while their government was setup and solidified (which still hasn't really happened).

As to whether this whole endeavor will be ruled successful, will take many, many years. From today's vantage point, no, it wasn't successful. We replaced a despot with an extremely unstable government with little control. Given numerous examples to our true enemies of why they should hate us and recruit more in their cause, and we cost ourselves a fortune for something we never should've went to war for in the first place if given the proper intel.

Sykotyk

I would say that Iraq was as big of a blunder as there ever was.

http://www.alternet.org/world/123818/

Paladin;468729 wrote:We could have handled the Afghan situation and had a solid chance at Bin Laden.

Agreed

We , however, took our eyes off the ball and played politics with a phony war.

Agreed, at the time it wasn't phony, then the intelligence made it that way.

The minute W. started a phony war in Iraq, he ruined the deficit because he did not pay for either war as he cut taxes ( a real dumb azz move)

The two weren't directly linked. While he is the CINC, it was the intelligence and the VP office that get most of the blame. Plus, the tax cuts were an economic measure in 2002-2003 to stimulate the economy which was still recovering from the .com burst and 9/11.

and began killing wholesale numbers of innocents in Irag & Afghanistan.

Wars have innocents, but we were not intentionally killing innocents and actually could have made things a lot worse, but held off.

We'll have decades of enemies built just over that.

Perhaps, but look at the turnaround from 2006 to today.

The civil war may prove very costly as it will force Middle East countries to choose a side to back.

Ehh, debatable as the rest of the region wants a stable Iraq as any instability could spill over.I'd also say, it is not a civil war anymore, just like Lebanon with a lot of unease.

The impact hits oil ( and its price)

Past or present? Past it was other factors, and present oil has stabilized and been constant the last few months.

and alienates more Muslim countries aligned against us .

It is one factor of many, correct. But, there are many others.

Huge screw-up that cooks our goose for generations to come.

Yes, unknown to be seen. I think the surge and COIN strategy turned the tide and allowed the democracy to start to grow. We have no idea what could happen. It could be like Lebanon or it could be explode and fall apart.

CinciX12;467970 wrote:Completely agree. Bush got screwed over by people he trusted as far as intelligence went. Blaming him for making decisions that other people technically make by gathering intelligence isn't fair. Give me the information that, as far we know, he got and I am making the same decision.

Saddam needed, and most certainly deserved to die for the million messed up things he had done and was currently doing at the time.

And as far as a stable democracy in Iraq, hopefully the CIA is all over who wins and loses those 'democratic' elections as well. Heathens don't know how to run a country, we might as well aid our own interests in the region.

Pretty sure every nation that's ever lost a colony has said those same words just before the situation exploded.