It's a secret no longer.

[PLC1]

Remember the war that was supposed to have lasted less than six months, and pay for itself from oil money? The one that was supposed to have few if any US casualties? Well, it has passed a new milestone.

The way it was:

COFFIN PICTURES PUBLISHED DESPITE BAN BY PENTAGON

The Pentagon's ban on images of dead soldiers' homecomings at all military bases was briefly relaxed Thursday, as hundreds of photographs of flag-draped coffins at Dover Air Force Base were released on the Internet by a Web site dedicated to combating government secrecy.

Earlier this week, the Seattle Times published a similar photo taken by a military contractor, who was later fired for taking photos of coffins of war dead being loaded onto a transport plane in Kuwait.

The way it is:

Now that the death toll has reached 4,000, everyone knows that too many have died.

 

[Dr.Who]

Remember the war that was supposed to have lasted less than six months, and pay for itself from oil money? The one that was supposed to have few if any US casualties? Well, it has passed a new milestone.

The way it was:

COFFIN PICTURES PUBLISHED DESPITE BAN BY PENTAGON




The way it is:

Now that the death toll has reached 4,000, everyone knows that too many have died.

Perhaps things would have turned out differently if half of congress had not undermined the effort.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Perhaps things would have turned out differently if half of congress had not undermined the effort.

or maybe it was that whole

NO WMD
the lies told to base the war on
The complete lack of a plan to deal with Insurgents...or even a government
I think zero best sums up the Security we provided as Iraq Fell...and we let the looting go on.
That whole issue of It took Bush CO. a year to even start to see that we where fighting a Insurgency.
Generals who spoke out before the war where silenced....and correct
the "Surge" was Far to small and far to late( day 1 would have been a good start)
Disbanding the Army...dumbest move they could have made...Disbanded army = 100,000 armed trained people with no jobs and pissed at you.. Some find that worse then armed Trained people who you can use under the right leadership.
Bush CO cant secure the borders here...I guess its no shock it never came to mind to do that In iraq....now or back when it started.
Rummy was Fired...about 4 years late

but yea blame congress...its not like Bush is in charge or anything

 

[Andy]

or maybe it was that whole

NO WMD
the lies told to base the war on
The complete lack of a plan to deal with Insurgents...or even a government
I think zero best sums up the Security we provided as Iraq Fell...and we let the looting go on.
That whole issue of It took Bush CO. a year to even start to see that we where fighting a Insurgency.
Generals who spoke out before the war where silenced....and correct
the "Surge" was Far to small and far to late( day 1 would have been a good start)
Disbanding the Army...dumbest move they could have made...Disbanded army = 100,000 armed trained people with no jobs and pissed at you.. Some find that worse then armed Trained people who you can use under the right leadership.
Bush CO cant secure the borders here...I guess its no shock it never came to mind to do that In iraq....now or back when it started.
Rummy was Fired...about 4 years late

but yea blame congress...its not like Bush is in charge or anything

There were WMD. Everyone should know that.
There were not lies told to base the war on. That itself, is a lie.
The idea we provided zero security is a joke. Our congress prevented us from fully engaging. Perhaps if the public had fully supported the war instead of believing the most ignorant statement ever, that Saddam didn't have WMDs, then that wouldn't have been an issue.
Yeah the war plan wasn't perfect, and we should have put more troops on the ground to start. Hind sight is 20/20, and complaining is easy isn't it?
Bush can't secure the boarders? You do realize that there is this large group of people called Congress, and that the boarder security has been law since the 80s?

Fools blame one person and ignore the other 530 some members of Congress that have put in billions of dollars of earmark pork spending, instead of funding the security of our nation.

Boarder security in Iraq? Is that a joke? If we lined our troops around the Iraqi boarder, we'd have people attacking us from outside iraq, and from inside iraq. Now there is a brilliant plan. Let's line our troops up single file between two groups that want to kill us. Even the French's plan of surrender is better than that.

No... first you weed out enemies within Iraq, while at the same time rebuilding Iraqs own police and military force. Then, you gradually release territory back to self rule. That is what we are doing, it's working. Soon we will have an ally in the middle east, that is liberated from our enemies and from religious fanatics. Something that has been needed for a long time to the Arabian people. We can only hope they do well with this opportunity.

 

[Bunz]

Andy,
I would disagree with most of your post. Firstly, the notion of blaming congress, who has given Bush everything he has asked for in terms of funding for this debacle is very shortsighted.
Now congress may have begrudgingly gave thier funding support but it is there nonetheless.

Now in terms of being outspoken, it is called checks and balances. There by design and working quite well in its practice. The fact of the matter is this, Iraq is Bush's war. The blame or praise goes nowhere else but to the executive branch. That is the foreign policy and war making arm of the government. Congress just provides the funds in this case.

 

[Dr.Who]

Andy,
I would disagree with most of your post. Firstly, the notion of blaming congress, who has given Bush everything he has asked for in terms of funding for this debacle is very shortsighted.
Now congress may have begrudgingly gave thier funding support but it is there nonetheless.

Now in terms of being outspoken, it is called checks and balances. There by design and working quite well in its practice. The fact of the matter is this, Iraq is Bush's war. The blame or praise goes nowhere else but to the executive branch. That is the foreign policy and war making arm of the government. Congress just provides the funds in this case.

If it were true that congress just provided the funds then apparently all they would need to do to end the war would be to defund it. But just as their hands were tied to defund it the President's hands were tied to wage it correctly.

 

[PLC1]

Perhaps things would have turned out differently if half of congress had not undermined the effort.

Yes, absolute rulers that don't have to worry about those pesky checks and balances do find it easier to make war on other countries. Congress did, however, approve of the war in the first place, and did provide "emergency" funding for it. How it is still an "emergency" after five years is a mystery to me, but that's another story.

There were WMD. Everyone should know that.

Yes, no doubt they will be found any day now.

 

[Dr.Who]

IN case anyone should think that it was I who said there were WMD I would like to make it clear that my post and that of another were mixed in a response to them.

Also, while there were not found WMD, Powells case for the war inlcuded several reasons for going to war, he made it clear what the evidence was for WMD and congress had the ability to judge the value of it.

It is nice that people can focus on the fact that WMD were not found. But the other reasons for going to war are conveniently ignored because they remain as valid.

Sadaam did want to develop WMD, he did want to use them, he did want to harm us, he was obstructing the efforts of the inspectors, and he did have plans in place which would allow him to develop WMD within months once the inspectors left or were rendered inneffective.

Read what powell said here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030205-1.html

He stated his main purpose was to talk about a man who was convicted by the UN to be in breach of his obligations to disarm 16 times over 12 years.

He then said that his second purpose was to share what we knew about his weapons programs. He then said:

What you will see is an accumulation of facts and disturbing patterns of behavior. The facts on Iraqis' behavior--Iraq's behavior demonstrate that Saddam Hussein and his regime have made no effort--no effort--to disarm as required by the international community. Indeed, the facts and Iraq's behavior show that Saddam Hussein and his regime are concealing their efforts to produce more weapons of mass destruction.

The focus of this is not the existing weapons but the efforts to produce weapons and to have a WMD program.

The case for existing WMD was weak and we all knew it. The case for Sadaam being in breach was undisputable and the case for him wanting to continue a weapons program and for being a menace to us was very strong.

People who ignore what was undisputable and strong and who focus on what we all knew to be weak are just deflecting.