Up for Debate: Last U.S. troops leave Iraq

Sunday, December 18, 2011 at 11:48pm

Reflecting back on the war in Iraq as the last U.S. combat troops have left the country, what are your thoughts? Was the war that cost the U.S. about $1 trillion and some 4,500 Americans worth the outcome? Are the U.S., Iraq and the world better because of it?

Filed under: City Voices
Tagged: Up for Debate

106 Comments on this post:

By: yogiman on 12/18/11 at 11:42

The Irag "war" was not a declared war and It was not pursued as a win situation. The lives lost are unjustified.

The US has not been in a declared war to win since WWII even though we have been in several conflicts with many lives lost.

Putting men and women side by side in conflict situations is a too damn political situation for its efforts..

By: Captain Nemo on 12/19/11 at 2:13

We should have never been there in the first place. It is another fine mess that the Republicans got us into.

By: Captain Nemo on 12/19/11 at 2:26

By: bfra on 12/17/11 at 4:57
yogi has really flipped today: Was heard singing:
They're coming to take me away, ha-haaa!!
They're coming to take me away, ho-ho, hee-hee, ha-haaa
To the funny farm. Where life is beautiful all the time and I'll be
happy to see those nice young men in their clean white coats and they're
coming to take me away, ha-haaa!!!!!

By: yogiman on 12/17/11 at 6:28
Are you trying to welcome me to your club? Thanks, I'll pass.

By: Captain Nemo on 12/18/11 at 12:07
bfra-

The old fool thinks that the song, they’re coming to take me away, is a invite to join normal people.

No yogi it is a song about men in white coats coming to take you to the Looney Bin.

Such a idiot this old yogiman is.
By: yogiman on 12/18/11 at 12:42
I presume you learned the song from practice and experience, dumba... Congratulations!
*****************************************************************

That is right yogi; I do have plenty of experience. I use to pick up crazies like you and haul them to a paddy cell. We would sing the song to confuse idiots like you. Good thing for you that service is not around today.

By: Captain Nemo on 12/19/11 at 3:19

By: sidneyames on 12/13/11 at 8:32
sidneyames Message for Yogi: Hey Yogi, hope you're having a good day. How about those Denver Broncos? Mmmmmmm! Must be that quarterback. Funny how when he's winning no one on this site is yacking about how he can't play football. Oh well.

Patriots 41

Broncos 23

The road to hell is paved with smugness.

By: dargent7 on 12/19/11 at 4:44

Titans LOST to the only winnless team, the Colts.
"CJ", our $50.million dollar boy, by the half, had 9 carries for 18 yds. The commentators, Dan Fouts, said both teams were playing, "flat".
They billed the Broncos and Patriots as "Beauty and the beast". "Tebow-itus" hit a bump in the road.
The Packers finally lost one.
My Lions won....
....back to topic: Get the USA OUT of there. Never should of gone in. $239.million a DAY, 365 days a year, for 9.0 years. GW Bush's & Cheney's insanity.
The usual crop of nutz over at The Tennessean all said yesterday, "Obama had notin' to do wit it", "it was all GW Bush's timeframe and decision making.
Like that dummy knew the war would end in (almost) 2012.
Had McCain won in '08, we'd still be there with his Viargra induced "surges".

By: yogiman on 12/19/11 at 6:23

dargent7,

Check the facts a little bit. Our nation has been in one conflict after another since WWII.., with both parties in power. I guess it just matters to the party it favors the most.

Wars are started by "leaders" of nations or religions. I'd argue; let's put them into a room, lock the door and let them fight it out.

By: yogiman on 12/19/11 at 6:28

dumba..,

How about trying to make a comment about the subject at hand. You only seem to have so much mentality to use.

Quit looking so ridiculous every day.

By: Loner on 12/19/11 at 6:56

Good morning, Nashville!

The Iraq war was fought for well-publicized and hyped-up "good reasons" and it was fought for undisclosed (or denied) "real reasons". Junior Bush and his Haliburtonized Vice President, Dick Cheney, used the 9-11 attacks as a casus belli for two elective wars, first in Afghanistan and then in Iraq. The Iraq War lasted about nine years and we have entered our eleventh year in Afghanistan, with no end in sight.

The Iraq War was a stupid diversion from the main mission in Afghanistan, which was to kill Bin Laden and throw the Taliban and Al Qaeda out of Afghanistan. Junior Bush used the US Congress and the US armed forces to carry out a personal vendetta against Saddam Hussein and his sons...the Israelis eagerly helped Bush-Cheney out, they provided the phony "WMD" intelligence reports....the rest is history.

IMO, both Bush and Cheney could be tried as war criminals...these two chickenhawks deserve to be in prison, not out on the lecture tour.

By: yogiman on 12/19/11 at 7:10

Loner,

Our nation has been in few declared wars since its beginning. It has been in one conflict after another since WWII, with both parties involved.

We haven't been in a 'win' conflict since WWII. They have all cost too many lives simply because of politics.

By: govskeptic on 12/19/11 at 7:18

Such great wisdom derives from looking and judging through the rear-view
mirror. While much too early to truly judge this expensive endeavor as to
whether any of it's original purposes will ever be achieved is in doubt!
One thing is for certain: Whether good or bad this country appears to be
incapable of entering a conflict to win! Yes, there is hawkish talk to do so
as we enter, but politics and internal conflict as to execution immediately
takes center stage to create an impossible mission for the military.
Since WWII we did win in Granada and Panama, tied in Korea, lost to
Vietnam and our current spitting conflict with Mexico. Need bigger bombs!

By: Loner on 12/19/11 at 7:19

Declarations of War are as "quaint" as the idea of universal human rights....both major political parties are beholden to the War Lobby, which is a tripartite affair consisting of three separate, but related lobbies: Defense, Israel & Energy, (DIE).

The selfish interests of all three lobbies come together in the Middle East, hence our counter-productive meddling in the region. What's good for the US taxpayer is not good for the War Lobby...powerful special interests, like that, will always trump the public's interest. The USSC's Citizens United decision will only exacerbate this problem.

Our conflicts will be fought primarily for economic reasons, but other "good reasons" will always be used to get the gullible masses behind these schemes. Yes, the masses truly are asses.....they elected Junior Bush twice....I rest my case.

By: Loner on 12/19/11 at 7:23

North Korea's lovable despot has croaked...his son, the obese and inbred spoiled brat...grandson of the guy who started the Korean War, is being anointed, as supreme leader, as we type....dynastic socialism...like our dynastic democracy....is a crime against humanity.

By: serr8d on 12/19/11 at 7:26

Now here's a man who knows what economic freedom means:

We either can go down the road we are on, a road where the individual is allowed to succeed only so much before being punished with ruinous taxation, where commerce ignores government action at its own peril, and where the state decides how a massive share of the economy's resources should be spent.

Or we can return to the road we once knew and which has served us well: a road where individuals acting freely and with little restraint are able to pursue fortune and prosperity as they see fit, a road where the government's role is not to shape the marketplace but to help prepare its citizens to prosper from it.

In short, we must choose between the straight line promised by the statists and the jagged line of economic freedom. The straight line of gradual and controlled growth is what the statists promise but can never deliver. The jagged line offers no guarantees but has a powerful record of delivering the most prosperity and the most opportunity to the most people. We cannot possibly know in advance what freedom promises for 312 million individuals. But unless we are willing to explore the jagged line of freedom, we will be stuck with the straight line. And the straight line, it turns out, is a flat line.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203893404577100330414585006.html

...because it's much more important to retain Capitalism and our freedoms than to follow today's Social (Obama) Democrats' piping that's leading inexorably to Marxism.

(Oh, and Saddam Hussein agrees with every thing Loner says.

JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOs~! )

By: Loner on 12/19/11 at 7:35

Serr8d trotted out a WSJ piece written by Jeb Bush....the tanned and rested member of the Bush royal family. I swear, thses Bushites are the descendants of the Torries, the treasonous loyalists who did not wish for the American colonies to break away from the British monarchy....they still pine for hereditary rulers, in spite of the dismal history of that approach to governance.

As for the WSJ, I happen to by posting on this WSJ board:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204791104577107350219610874.html?mod=WSJ_article_comments#articleTabs%3Dcomments

The WSJ censors would not let me post the phrase "tea bagger"...Rupert Murdoch buggered the once prestigious Wall Street Journal...it's now a right-wing tabloid, printed on full-sized news stock....they use the Orwellian Newspeak language at the WSJ.

Please join us....BTW, I post using my real name on the WSJ.

By: Loner on 12/19/11 at 7:50

From Jeb Bush's WSJ rant: 'In short, we must choose between the straight line promised by the statists and the jagged line of economic freedom.''

This is a not-so-subtle appeal to the secessionist-friendly, Washington-loathing Tea Baggers. It is a nostalgic longing for those Dickensian times, when Scrooge could screw Tiny Tim's dad with absolute impunity.

Ah, if only we could do away with Washington, DC, once and for all...then all our problems would go away....Jeb Bush thinks like Jeff Davis and Jeb Stuart....he loathes the federal government and would like to be elected POTUS, so as to continue his family's mission of destroying the American federal government, from the inside.

By: Ummm... on 12/19/11 at 8:04

The "Bush Doctrine" is the worst foreign policy blunder imaginable. They conflated Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda to dupe the public (most of whom apparently just wanted to go kill some Arabs, any Arabs after 9/11) into their unconscionable war which has cost our country 4500 young lives and a TRILLION dollars. I guess it would be OK to try Bush and Cheney as war criminals...before we hang them.

By: Loner on 12/19/11 at 8:07

The Koreans love their Kim family dynasty. Serr8d, Ben Dover and several others love the Bush family dynasty. Isn't that special? And those guys portray themselves as American patriots...with patriots like those two, who needs subversives? Maybe the Founders were dead wrong, maybe we should have made George Washington our king and let his descendants rule over us with impunity.....such an arrangement would suit the Tea Baggers just fine....they loathe the idea of representative democracy, they prefer to be ruled.

By: yogiman on 12/19/11 at 8:15

I believe we're loosing to Mexico, govskeptic, since our "guvmunt" has recently placed three border patrol agents in prison at the Mexican government's request for doing their duty by stopping Mexico's drug smugglers.

By: Loner on 12/19/11 at 8:25

Did loyal Reaganite Republicans save a DNA sample of Ronald Reagan? Did they reproduce a cloned gipper? Is the cloned Reagan(s) now a young man out there, secretly ready to step in as the Republican answer to the "Dear Leader" concept? When will their final solution to the leadership issue be revealed to the rest of the world?

Of course, being cloned is not "natural born", but Yogi would be willing to forget about all that nonsense, if a cloned Ronald Reagan was to suddenly appear.

By: Ummm... on 12/19/11 at 8:32

Exactly what are we letting "loose" in Mexico, yogiman? Apparently he just doesn't know how to spell "losing." (Which isn't surprising really- I wonder if he'll claim to have done it on purpose for some bogus reason, the way he did with "course" a few days ago?)

By: yogiman on 12/19/11 at 8:34

Loner,

It isn't too bad to support a person legally qualified as President when we are stupid enough to elect them to that office. We can put up with it before we get them out.

But it is too bad to support a person whom isn't legally qualified as President when you are stupid enough to vote for them to take that office even though they could not be legally elected to the office. At least, not by the Constitution and laws I read.

By the way, I'll also make my officer to send you a pocket size copy of the Constitution as I have a couple of your co-posters on this site.

By: Loner on 12/19/11 at 8:42

Oh no...Soetero Syndrome rears its ugly head on our board...once again. Science has no cure...stand by for obsessive compulsive vocalizations like "USURP!"...."USURP!...."USURP"!

Poor devil is unaware of his disease...he's in a world of his own.

By: Ummm... on 12/19/11 at 8:43

Wow, yogiman, you're actually a "birther!" I didn't know there were any of you wackjobs left!

By: Captain Nemo on 12/19/11 at 8:44

By: yogiman on 12/19/11 at 6:28
dumba..,

How about trying to make a comment about the subject at hand. You only seem to have so much mentality to use.

Quit looking so ridiculous every day.
*****************************************************************

Tell you what yogi. The day you stop being so ridiclous about Obama is the day I stop telling thee truth about you.

By: Captain Nemo on 12/19/11 at 8:50

By: yogiman on 12/19/11 at 6:28
dumba..,

How about trying to make a comment about the subject at hand. You only seem to have so much mentality to use.

*****************************************************************
Practice what you preach stupid.

By: yogiman on 12/19/11 at 8:56

Sorry, Ummm,

Guess I was typing too fast and hit that "o" key too many times in spelling "losing". Sorry I made it difficult for you to understand when you "read" it..

By: Captain Nemo on 12/19/11 at 9:00

Welcome Ummm. Yogi is the village idiot.

By: BenDover on 12/19/11 at 9:03

The decision about whether to go it was decided with large bi-partisan support and agreement in 2003. Once you're in then becomes the question as to whether we finish the job. You can't un-invade the country as much as the Monday morning quarterbacks used the ridiculous idea of doing so as a stick with which to relentlessly beat their political opponents with.

The bigger test was in '07 when everyone was calling to let the country go and fall into certain civil war and chaos. The generals' green-zone strategy wasn't working and was much to blame for lack of progress on the ground. It was Bush's assessment that the one strategy that was working over there was Patreaus and his highly effective counter-insurgency methods and they should be applied through-out the country in what was to become known as the Surge.

This strategy gave us control of the country again and turned what would certainly have been another re-make of the killing fields into an orderly transition of power.

The core problem with the invasion was the fact that we sparked an insurrection against Saddam in '93 and then for political reasons left hundreds of thousands of them to be slaughtered in a bay-of-pigs-esque disaster that prevented us gaining anything more than indifference from a cowed population we liberated from the tyrant Saddam in 2003.

Their fate is in God's hands now though and I pray the bones of democracy we helped them build will not crumble.

By: yogiman on 12/19/11 at 9:10

Ummm,

Call me a "birther" if you wish. I'll just consider the source and ignore it. But my thought of a "birther" is the idiots of our nation that are so willing to accept a person in the Oval Office who has usurped that office by illegal activity. I feel you have "birthed" him.

If you understood the "rules" of election to that office, you should understand why our founders placed the "natural born status" law into our Constitution. Too much evidence has been presented showing Barry Soetoro is in that office by usurpation.

Yet, you feel he was "elected" to the office. Question: By what law can you be "elected" to an office you aren't legally qualified for? Majority vote? Sorry, the majority cannot vote someone in office who isn't legally eligible for aid office. And that means Barry Soetoro in the Oval Office.

By: Ummm... on 12/19/11 at 9:11

The vast majority of visitors (tourists) in Iraq now are Iranian. Iraq is now most likely destined to become very similar to Iran. Good job, Bush! You really fixed that problem, and it only cost 4500 American lives and a trillion dollars of the taxpayer's money- what a great bargain!

By: Ummm... on 12/19/11 at 9:15

By the way, yogiman, I've read too many of your posts now to buy the "typing too fast" excuse. Uneducated ignorance like yours is very difficult to conceal.

By: Captain Nemo on 12/19/11 at 9:18

The bi-partisan support was misled by lies from Chicken Hawks.

By: Captain Nemo on 12/19/11 at 9:25

By: yogiman on 12/19/11 at 9:10
Ummm,
Call me a "birther" if you wish. I'll just consider the source and ignore it. But my thought of a "birther" is the idiots of our nation that are so willing to accept a person in the Oval Office who has usurped that office by illegal activity. I feel you have "birthed" him.

It only took one comment from Ummm and yogi the old yogi start his insults. That the way to drive people away.

By: yogiman on 12/19/11 at 9:29

I'll admit, Ummm, I do make too many typing errors. I guess I'm trying to put my point across too fast and don't edit my typing too good. I usually just "hit the button" and let it go.

I'll try to slow down and try to make you understand what I'm typeing a little better.

By: Captain Nemo on 12/19/11 at 9:34

Ummm, you need to understand something about. He is the first person in his family that does not have a tail. He does have 12 toes and a micro brain.

By: BenDover on 12/19/11 at 9:43

http://www.factcheck.org/iraq/anti-war_ad_says_bush_cheney_rumsfeld.html

By: Ummm... on 12/19/11 at 9:43

"I'll admit, Ummm, I do make too many typing errors. I guess I'm trying to put my point across too fast and don't edit my typing too good. I usually just "hit the button" and let it go.

I'll try to slow down and try to make you understand what I'm typeing a little better."

For all those with even marginal experience studying the subject of English- I rest my case.

By: yogiman on 12/19/11 at 9:51

How about giving me a lesson, Ummm. I was taught the method of 75 years ago when I started to school. When did you learn? I'd like to be brought up to date. What are the "new methods" given?

By: bfra on 12/19/11 at 9:54

By: BenDover on 12/19/11 at 9:43

http://www.factcheck.org/iraq/anti-war_ad_says_bush_cheney_rumsfeld.html
=================================================

Ben, with your faith in the Bush/Cheney diabolical reign, you should be ashamed to offer this site, made up of nothing but lame excuses.

By: Loner on 12/19/11 at 9:57

Ben still supports the invasion and occupation of Iraq; tries to blame the Democrats in Congress for war mongering...as it turned out, Zionists in both parties voted to invade, at Israel's behest...Israel provided the phony WMD reports...the "yellow cake" etc. And Israel bribes our Congress critters royally...check the facts here:

http://maplight.org/us-congress/interest/J5100/view/all

When Israel demanded that the US invade Afghanistan and then Iraq, these bribed federal lawmakers sent our forces into harm's way, in order to advance the national interests of a Jewish theocracy in Palestine....no wonder then, that the Arabs and Muslims hate our guts....our national interests have been hijacked by apartheid Zionists.

We got hit on 9-11 because we support the Zionist experiment in Palestine and because we are stationing US troops on Arab land, in order to secure the realm for the apartheid-loving Israelis...Bin Laden did not lie about his reasons for the attack...the Zionist-controlled US media did all the lying...and the filthy lies continue.

By: BenDover on 12/19/11 at 9:59

I picked factcheck because of their left leaning bias, bfra. Even they say Bush didn't lie.

By: BenDover on 12/19/11 at 10:07

I see no reason to believe anything more than the facts of the matter leading up to the war in Iraq, loner. Saddam was a state sponsor of terrorism, attempted to assassinate a US president, was firing on our aircraft patrolling the no fly zone, had ignored the terms of the '93 cease fire, was in violation of 12 years of UN sanctions, played cat and mouse with the weapons inspectors rather than opening country up to unfettered inspection as required by the UN, was advancing plans toward a nuclear weapon, and was a maniacal and murderous dictator killing his own people by the hundreds of thousands. Given the information at the time we would have been idiots not to take him out.

By: Captain Nemo on 12/19/11 at 10:07

By: yogiman on 12/19/11 at 9:51
How about giving me a lesson, Ummm. I was taught the method of 75 years ago when (I started to school.) When did you learn? I'd like to be brought up to date. What are the "new methods" given?

Let see yogi is 81 now and he started school 75 years ago. That would mean that he did not go to school when he was 16.

A gifted child LOL

By: bfra on 12/19/11 at 10:09

Ben, the only thing I read in your site, was the excuses leaning toward, trying to make more excuses for all the lies Bush/Cheney fed the public.

By: Loner on 12/19/11 at 10:11

Bfra, Bush apologists have no shame....shame requires acknowledging that a mistake was made.

For the Bushite loyalists, Bush and Cheney were infallible...if there were any "mistakes" made, they were committed by the boogey men - the Democrats. It's a sweat-stained narrative....a few self-deluded folks have bought into it and the TP-GOP is pinning their hopes on those deluded believers....it's a faith-based thing, when one has "faith", logic takes a hike, history means nothing and common sense becomes uncommon.

These Bushites would anoint Jeb Bush in a New York minute.....they are closet monarchists...let's face it, anybody who thinks that there is a heavenly kingdom, ruled by a father & son, is probably a closet monarchist, not a lower case "d" democrat. These pious Bushites long for the day when their opinion and vote won't mean jack sh*t....that's their idea of heaven.

By: Captain Nemo on 12/19/11 at 10:12

Reasons for Iraq War: Bush or Cheney?

September 11, 20012001. War selling by neocons' PNAC
Sept. 11. Rumsfeld: "Go massive. Sweep it all up. Related and Not."
Sept. 15. At Camp David, Wolfowitz made the case for action against Iraq.
Sept. 19. Rumsfeld, Perle call two-day meeting. Outcome summarized in The PNAC Letter, signed by Perle. "Even if evidence does not link Iraq ... remove Saddam Hussein." Focuses on Iraq, Hezbollah, the Palesinian Authority, little on Bin Laden.

All that remained was to convince Bush, and they had him surrounded.

http://zfacts.com/p/775.html

By: Kosh III on 12/19/11 at 10:21

FWIW
I opposed the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Afghanistan had very little to do with al-Queda and everything to do with insuring that
Unocal could build it's pipeline across the country.
As late as June '11 Bush was working with the Taliban to get the pipeline approved. The negotiations failed because Unocal wouldn't pay what Afghanistan wanted.

Suddenly we go to war and fail to get al-Queda but the first US Ambassador to Aghanistan was a former high ranking exec with----ta da!!! Unocal.

Now they've got their pipeline and we've got the shaft.

---------------
Iraq was about oil oil oil. Anything else is a lie.

"Iraq will not require sustained aid." Mitch Daniels OMB Director 3/18/03
"how long that conflict could last. It could last, you know, six days, six weeks, I doubt six months." Rumsfeld2/7/03
"We found the weapons of mass destruction" Bush 5/29/03 to Polish TV interview
"We know where (WMDS) are. " Rumsfeld 3/30/03

By: Kosh III on 12/19/11 at 10:23

We are still occupying Iraq. We have thousands of troops still there and permanent bases.

Last year the State Dept budget for Iraq ONLY was 6 billion. BILLION!

We should follow Washington's advice. Non-intervention.

By: Captain Nemo on 12/19/11 at 10:26

I like Ben, but he has this weakness about Bush and Cheney that I find hard to get pass.

By: BenDover on 12/19/11 at 10:28

Having no shame, loner, it Obama claiming victory in Iraq as we stand down when if he'd had his way in '07 the region would have been abandoned to sectarian civil war, chaos and terror unseen in modern history.

Mr compassion and his cohorts in congress didn't care about that... all they cared about was scoring cheap political points in the form of the huge albatross it would have hung around Bush's neck.