I don't think it is just ideology that drove this, because forex, Tony Blair is a liberal and he {along with similarly faulty British intelligence} seemed to think likewise to GeorgeW that Saddam was a major threat who needed to be taken out ..

Recall the initial invasion was a smashing military success, and remember W's approval ratings were very high back in 2003 shortly after the invasion.  The failure was not just faulty intelligence about WMD's that didn't exist, but it was lack of understanding of the culture we were invading and as your fellow democrat Rickeyfan has put it, a lack of "Plan B" once all the problems started to arise in the post-invasion occupation.

This is where I start to feel a bit uncomfortable discussing this "mess" because one other AN member {not you} got upset at my posts and started to use labels that my content was racist, xenophobic, homophobic etc. -- and I wondered if he was upset because I was speaking insensitively about the Iraqi culture and people {although I still haven't understood where the homophobic accusation fit in there, heh}.

The point I was trying to make was that we have never encountered an Insurgency, or for lack of better terms, "Enemy", who has so wantonly and indiscriminately used Terror not just against us as "Invaders" but against its own innocent civilan native population.

Seems we have been "defeated" by an enemy or resistance that routinely sets off "suicide bombs" in:

• public buses/transit
  
• shopping markets/malls
  
• nursing homes
  
• college dorms
  
• hospitals
  
• places of worship
  
• religious icons

and so on .. indiscriminately terrorizing, maiming and killing innocent civilians {including children) in such a seemingly senseless way that we have never seen before ..

The term coined by Michael Medved and other talkshow radio hosts I've heard, is, "Islamo-Nazi Terror".  I think my mentioning that term may have offended my online friend but I hope folks understand it wasn't my coinage, I didn't invent it and just have heard it routinely used on talkshow radio I've listened to in discussion of the war ..

.. I assume they coined the term perhaps ..

• to described the fierceness {Nazi-like} of the insurgency and its determination to disrupt the political process in iraq, and

• the fact that groups like Al-Quaida are {for all we can tell} driven by islamic fundamentalism {although I think there are many moderate non-violent Muslims and Al-Quaida's brand of islam is a cultish theological distortion and abuse of islam}

• There is also the very complicated political situation, the centuries-old problems between Sunnis and Shia moslems, etc.  

Anyway, I wonder whether anything could have prepared us for what we have seen in the post-invasion insurgency.  I don't pretend to have easy answers and certainly didn't intend to offend my friend or give anyone impression that I am racist, homophobic, xenophobic, bigoted in any way ..

Quite honestly, I am, more than any of those above pejoratives, "baffled" -- I don't claim to have the answers.  Appreciate your civility and am sorry we got stuck over here in the righthand corner column discussin the war, hehe.

Go A's, Take Care,
Warmly, Ran

The Subject Title says it for me.  I think Bush and Blair are decent people.  I don't think they are evil. And they both thought this invasion was the right thing to do.  I don't think JFK or LBJ were bad folks .. Granted, maybe in order to become the Prez you have to have a Big Ego {g} .. I'll give that one to you .. but that {ambition} doesn't make a person evil ..

Now, I do think Nixon had obvious character issues, but I don't feel that way about GeorgeW or his dad.  Perhaps someone like Clinton had a bit of a sexual addiction problem but I don't think his character was sinister or anything of that nature .. I trusted him as my Prez ..

Most of our presidents {democratic or GOP} I have supported and don't feel are evil people.  Well we all have our dark side, and no doubt power can corrupt, but .. well I just don't get those vibes from GeorgeW but that's just me, my opinion ..

We don't always get what we want, not in baseball {which team wins} nor in politics {which party controls the white-house} -- so I will always support my President regardless of Party so long as he governs from the Center, doesn't engage in any unacceptable activity a la Nixon, etc ..

Anyway, getting back to the War, I'm not sure I agree with you that this Insurgency and the Mess in iraq was predictable.  I mean, the Fierceness and Relentlessness of it, the Blood-Thirsty Terror of it, the Political Complexity of it, etc.

Not to mention we don't have a lot of experience with islamic cultures.  The islamic world has been a bit of a mystery to the West.  When I replied to Rickeyfan's post, where he criticized Bush for not having a Plan-B, I agreed with most of his points, and added that, if we have learned anything from this mess of a war, it is perhaps some cultures are not ready for democracy ..

.. First, they have to want it.  They have to understand what it means.  They have to want the kind of freedom {and responsibility} that it entails.  Maybe the iraqis don't want it.  It is hard for me to understand why not, but then I am a westerner, I cannot see things through their eyes .. so I dunno .. That is not to badmouth iraqis or their culture, just saying, as I said before, I am pretty much baffled more than anything else.  If the democrats think they can do a better job with this mess, more power to them .. {g] ..

Would we have been better off leaving Saddam in power?  That I don't know, and it is moot since we have removed him from power {heck he is dead now} .. Saddam wasn't exactly a little angel himself {no pun intended A's fans, hehe}.  And I understand Saddam's sons, who would have inherited power, were worse than him .. so who knows, we might have  gotten forced into this mess, or something similar, .. just don't know .. not a comforting thought, devo, but Iran may be the next problem for us ..

I guess I am reluctant to be too critical of my leadership.  I think LBJ got a bad wrap.  We never have really "lost" any war militarily; - we have the mightiest, best-trained, hi-tech best-equipped, most effective military on earth bar none.  The only time we have suffered "defeat" is with political defeat, it isn't a military defeat ..

Take Care my Friend,
Warmly, Ran

This is debatable about W, but that depends on what is deemed a 'character' flaw.  From my blue-tinted lenses, W suffers from

A) A dangerous amount of arrogance in his refusal to genuinely listen to opinions of those that don't agree with him.  His black-and-white view might have worked in a simpler era like WWII, but the complexities of the modern age require a recognition that the issues of the world are usually in shades of grey.  The 'I'm always right and you're always wrong' / 'I'm the decision-maker' / 'If you're not with me, you're against me' POV is one that we usually assign to despots/dictators and I find it sad that it applies to our current president.  The fact that our country has lost the respect of much of the rest of the world can be directly attributed to our 'leader'.

or

B) The ability to be manipulated by the neocons that advocated war at any cost.

So W isn't evil by any stretch, but he's definitely either overconfident to the point of arrogance or a puppet.

"I will always support my President regardless of Party so long as he governs from the Center" - there you go.  You'd be very hard-pressed to find anyone from either party that would claim W is a 'govern from the center' president.

In all my points about not having a Plan-B, I find it incredibly naive of the administration for them to think that victory would come as easily as they thought it would.  So as it stands

Pros
A) Saddam out of power
B) No domestic attacks

Cons
A) Lotsa of Iraqi civilians dead.  Probably moreso than would've died with Saddam still in power.  (I think it is a good thing he's out, I just disagree with the means / motivation)
B) Iraqi middle class (the ones still alive) bailing out of the country in droves.
C) Destroyed infrastructure.
D) More or less civil war between the Sunnis and Shiites ... backed one way or another by Saudi Arabia and Iran (great, now the neighbors are involved)
E) 3000+ US soldiers dead
F) More US soldiers wounded

What must be a hard question from a soldier and/or his/her family - Why is the soldier maimed for life / dead?
Is the answer
A) To remove Saddam from power
B) Better the soldier injured/dead than US civilians
C) To force democracy on Iraq

Maybe it's my POV, but I don't think that any of those justified putting the lives our soldiers at risk.

On a "micro" level, I'm not sure what you can say to military families that have suffered tragedies.  If we only looked at the "micro", we could never use military force for any reason because there will always be such tragedies when our boys and gals are sent out; - armed conflict {called war or by any other label} leads to tragedies, and war is hell on the "micro" level and always will be ..

.. I guess it sounds unsatisfactory, platitudinous, and sanctimonious but I would answer any Vet, or military family, including Vietnam Vets, as to the "why" -- that they served their country and they died, or were maimed, lost limbs, disabled, whatever, -- doing just that -- doing their jobs in obedience to their superiors and in service to their country.  Obviously it is not their responsibility, and out of their control, as to the why on the "macro" level, -- the politics, or decisions of those over them in power;

-- Let me extend that, honestly even if the cause is totally just, as in WWII fighting the Nazis --  that still doesn't remove the sting of war, and tragedy .. the guys and gals in our military do it because they are patriots.  Along those lines I always thought it shameful how the Vietnam Vets were treated but that is a different subject ..

Let me just say also that I think it important for Republicans not to question the patriotism of Democrats {and vice versa} who differ over issues of the war etc; - not to equate political differences with lack of patriotism {or impugn one another's character just because we differ}.  We are all patriots here, we all love our good ol'USA just like we love our ball-club .. at least that is how I feel .. I mean, it is easy to become hypercritical of the U.S. but compare to other countries and we still have it so good here by comparison ..

Let me add in closing that I'm glad we remain civil and respectful in discussion, debate.  I abhor name-calling, you know what I mean, -- unless a person has expressed flagrant content that deserves pejorative and censure, we shouldn't call one another names {homophobic, xenophobic, racist, etc etc} but rather should be specific in our rebuttals and avoid the personal attacks and ad-hominem arguments that destroy amity and friendship, .. - and I'm glad we've done that here, respected one another, remained online friends in discussion and debate .. :) :)

Take Care,
Warmly, Ran

Guys I have been trying to exit from this Nico-initiated Mega-Thread for, oh, the last 10-15 posts or so {g}.  I have already conceded that the democrats are welcome to do better against the emergent problem of super-radical islamo-terror {including bringing to conclusion this present mess of a foreign conflict} -- if you think you can, -- and with emerging superstars like Barack Obama, or even with Hilary, coming upon the horizon, y'all may just get your chance {g}.

I put the all the emoticon {g}'s - grins - in my posts just to lighten it up a bit, so people don't think I'm feeling any animus or bad feelings, - as I'm certainly not, not at all.  Y'all are online friends here, I always remember this place is basically for A's fans to chat with  one another and gosh let's remember we root for the A's - I'm still a relative newbie but I would certainly remove my membership and leave this place if I felt folks were getting too edgy or taking offense at me or my views .. whether it would be my fault or some other reason for it, the point being I love to feel at peace and most definitely I didn't Google and wander upon a Site, a Site I thought was for A's fans to shoot the bull and enjoy each other, just to get involved with personal animus or bad feelings with other fans .. certainly not.

That is why I was so surprised by the one AN'er who started calling me names -- well, he said all my written content was homophobic, xenophobic, racist, etc. so I pretty much took it that way {ummm, if my content reflects my character, well ..} -- maybe he is very young and sees things in black-and-white, {I know I was at that tender age}, but it is hard not to take it personally when someone starts calling me names like that and impugning my integrity, character -- basically insinuating I have hatred in my heart which I know is not the case ..

Anyway guys, thanks for keeping it civil and amiable.  I will support whoever gets elected in '08, I still say it is easy to "Arm-Chair Quarter-Back" our Commander-in-Chief {be he/she a democrat or republican} but that's just me .. Hindsight is always 20-20, and all that ..

Take Care Guys, enjoyed the dialog,
Warmly, Ran