Why just Iraq?
 

There are millions of mothers prostituting themselves all around the world, and even here in the good old US of A. Why don't we invade Tijuana and set that city's feet on the path to true democracy?

What is this special debt that America owes to the people of Iraq, that we do not owe to say, Peru, or the Phillipines or Latvia?

Oh, thats right. We invaded Iraq and smashed the hell out of the place, turned out the military and all governmental offices and set a civil war into motion. But we took the fight TO the terrorists, rather than have to fight them here, and that justifies everything.

Just keep cheering the cheer and chanting the chant Tex. If you say things are going to get better in Iraq enough times, it must surely come true, right?

Who looks stupid today over Iraq? France or us?

It's quite possible this particular woman, and likely many others, are worse off at the moment than under the Saddam regime. It's hard to know ... I have a few books on my shelf detailing horrors under the previous rule. Do you think all Americans were living high-on-the-hog during the Revolutionary War?

In the end, the intent is that what comes out of this difficult period will be better than before. That doesn't mean the interim won't be excruciating. War is hell, there's no denying that.

This is a pretty bankrupt line of thinking that has been responded to time and again. The president laid out his case for why Iraq was worthy of invasion, moreso than other nations. It's clear you don't believe him. Fine.

No, but if Petraeus says it, it might.

War is not a popularity contest. I don't think the men of the American Revolution were considered geniuses at the time by the world either.

Why don't those that support continued intervention in Iraq support helping genocide in Darfur?

Because helping Iraqis is in our own interest, and helping Darfur is not?

I've linked a famous or infamous article by Noam Chomsky that crytstalized a lot of opposition to continuing the Vietnam War. It was published in 1965, seven years before our ignominious withdrawl. I disagree with much in this article, and much of what Chomsky says and writes. But the part of the article that resonates with me, that is wholly relevant to our Iraq adventure and prophetic, is the extensive discussion in the middle of the article (Irving Kristol is one of his punching bags) about the fraudulence, self-delusion, and sheer impracticality of the United States' assertions of the best intentions in the interest of the suffering civilians.

http://www.chomsky.info/articles/19670223.htm

Honestly now Tex
 

At this late date, can you seriously say Bush's decision to invade Iraq was correct?

Is America safer?

Are the Iraqi people better off?

Is America's position as the lone superpower more secure?

Do we have more allies around the globe?

Have we stabilized a strategically important oil producing ally?

Is democracy blossoming in Iraq? Elsewhere in the middle east or the Muslim world where it was not prior to lour invasion?

1. Was it the correct decision? That can't be answered yet. It will take years to figure that one out.

2. America hasn't been attacked, so it certainly isn't in more danger.

3. Is Iraq better off? Kind of tied to #1, but in certain areas the answer is undoubtedly yes.

4. I'm not sure what that means or what the relevance is.

5. See #4

6. Well, there is no longer a trading embargo on Iraq.

7. Blossoming? Yes. Is it where it needs to be yet? No.

Indy, I underestimated you
 

I had no idea how dry your wit is. From now on I'll read your posts with a different slant.

Especially your line about Democracy blossoming in Iraq. Everbody here in my office really got a kick out of that.

I'm curious, Mike. In two sentences or less, what do you view the purpose of the US military and US foreign policy to be?

You're going to have to give me a good reason to take you seriously before I start offering serious answers to your questions.

I know you from CB Tex
 

And I don't have to qualify myself before you will stoop to engage me in an internet discussion.

In spite of what you think, you ain't all that...

I didn't say I was "all that." As your response to Indy shows, you're more interested in clever quips and cute little jabs than actually having a serious discussion. I'm not here to perform for your amusement.