Iraq - Still, In Fact, Going On
- Thread starter padraig (u.s.)
- Start date
droid
Well-known member
Y'see, Iraq has been an utter disaster in principle and in practise. There's no argument to be made here.
All that can be done is to try and help Craner by bringing him face to face with the reality of the consequences of actions he cheerleaded.
It's like deprogramming a cult member, or rehabilitating the chronically institutionalised.
I do wonder if its even possible, but Im willing to try.
For his sake.
All that can be done is to try and help Craner by bringing him face to face with the reality of the consequences of actions he cheerleaded.
It's like deprogramming a cult member, or rehabilitating the chronically institutionalised.
I do wonder if its even possible, but Im willing to try.
For his sake.
Last edited:
droid
Well-known member
Butler said nothing credible after '99 because UNSCOM were disbanded.
Ritter, for all his faults said he was toeing the party line prior to '98 and his reports since then have been borne out by Blix, UNMVIC & history.
And then there's clear fabrications by Powell & Blair, outrageously exaggerated claims, distortion, Niger uranium, dodgy sources etc. The entire thing was a fait accompli in need of justification. Its clear as day.
I may have to adjust your diagnosis to encompass Credulous Personality Disorder.
Ritter, for all his faults said he was toeing the party line prior to '98 and his reports since then have been borne out by Blix, UNMVIC & history.
And then there's clear fabrications by Powell & Blair, outrageously exaggerated claims, distortion, Niger uranium, dodgy sources etc. The entire thing was a fait accompli in need of justification. Its clear as day.
I may have to adjust your diagnosis to encompass Credulous Personality Disorder.
sadmanbarty
Well-known member
Droid, here are a few points that might explain why a non-psychopath might support the war (or at least a hypothetical Iraq war). I’d be interested in you addressing them.
1) The supposition that there are two types of Iraq under Sadam. Pre-sanctions Iraq was highly repressive, genocidal and militarily expansionist (all of which with Western support of course). This all resulted in hundreds of thousands of dead. Post-sanctions Iraq was crippled economically, with crumbling infrastructure. Mortality rates are controversial for this period, with some placing them at nil and others in the hundreds of thousands.
2) Were the sanctions necessary to prevent Sadam continuing as he had done pre-sanctions?
3) Following the brutal crushing of uprisings in 1991 (which I’m sure you’d say the US was tacitly complicit in) the Iraqi population was not going to try to overthrow Sadam for a generation. Joint efforts to oust Sadam by the INC and the US were not fruitful.
4) The way the occupation was managed by Bremer and co resulted in more violence than if other, feasible policies were pursued. It’s not inconceivable that the aftermath of 2003 could have seen a lot less casualties.
5) The surge helped quell the civil war.
6) How would the arab spring have effected Iraq? Would we have another Syria? Would the sectarian war have eventually played out anyway, but it wouldn’t have US troops to quell it?
1) The supposition that there are two types of Iraq under Sadam. Pre-sanctions Iraq was highly repressive, genocidal and militarily expansionist (all of which with Western support of course). This all resulted in hundreds of thousands of dead. Post-sanctions Iraq was crippled economically, with crumbling infrastructure. Mortality rates are controversial for this period, with some placing them at nil and others in the hundreds of thousands.
2) Were the sanctions necessary to prevent Sadam continuing as he had done pre-sanctions?
3) Following the brutal crushing of uprisings in 1991 (which I’m sure you’d say the US was tacitly complicit in) the Iraqi population was not going to try to overthrow Sadam for a generation. Joint efforts to oust Sadam by the INC and the US were not fruitful.
4) The way the occupation was managed by Bremer and co resulted in more violence than if other, feasible policies were pursued. It’s not inconceivable that the aftermath of 2003 could have seen a lot less casualties.
5) The surge helped quell the civil war.
6) How would the arab spring have effected Iraq? Would we have another Syria? Would the sectarian war have eventually played out anyway, but it wouldn’t have US troops to quell it?
droid
Well-known member
I would suggest you examine the criteria for Jus Ad Bellum.
Secondly, I would be interested to see a convincing argument for the moral right of intervention given the fact that self-interest has clearly been proven to be the reason for 99% of invasions, wars and interventions in history.
Secondly, I would be interested to see a convincing argument for the moral right of intervention given the fact that self-interest has clearly been proven to be the reason for 99% of invasions, wars and interventions in history.
sadmanbarty
Well-known member
Human Rights Watch did a piece saying that Iraq was not on the brink of a massacre and as such the war couldn't be considered a humanitarian intervention. I would concur.
As to your second point, you could argue that it doesn't matter if the US was acting out of self interest, just so long as the people of Iraq were better off afterwards. Essentially the argument that self-interest and morality are not mutually exclusive.
Again, I would be interested in you addressing my points in my previous post, if you have the time.
droid
Well-known member
Jus Ad Bellum:
Legitimate authority: No second UN resolution
Just cause: No imminent danger, no credible threat, no self defense argument
Right intention: lol
Probability of success: Always low, close to zero in the medium/long term, as borne out by events.
Proportionality: Clearly the benefits of the war (whatever they may be) have been far outweighed by the evils.
If Jus ad bellum is not satisfied then we must look at aggression, the supreme war crime.
The definition is instructive.
Legitimate authority: No second UN resolution
Just cause: No imminent danger, no credible threat, no self defense argument
Right intention: lol
Probability of success: Always low, close to zero in the medium/long term, as borne out by events.
Proportionality: Clearly the benefits of the war (whatever they may be) have been far outweighed by the evils.
If Jus ad bellum is not satisfied then we must look at aggression, the supreme war crime.
The definition is instructive.
sadmanbarty
Well-known member
I guess the points in my long post would be that the war could have easily been more successful and that it's not inconceivable that the benefits could have outweighed the evils.
Like I said, I'd be interested in a point by point explanation of your thoughts regarding that long post (sorry to be pedantic).
sadmanbarty
Well-known member
I suppose you could also argue that morality trumps international law. Something may be both the right thing to do and illegal.
droid
Well-known member
Before I address any of those points Id like to clarify something.
I dont think you have to necessarily have been a psychopath to have supported the war in iraq. Misguided, naive, historically ignorant, stupid etc. are all equally valid reasons.
What I am saying is that 15 years later when the awful consequences of the decision (predicted by the anti-war movement), are clear, when the rationale for war has been exposed as deceit and lies, when the region is burning and millions of people have been killed or emiserated and you STILL stand by that decision?
That is a sign of something wrong.
I dont think you have to necessarily have been a psychopath to have supported the war in iraq. Misguided, naive, historically ignorant, stupid etc. are all equally valid reasons.
What I am saying is that 15 years later when the awful consequences of the decision (predicted by the anti-war movement), are clear, when the rationale for war has been exposed as deceit and lies, when the region is burning and millions of people have been killed or emiserated and you STILL stand by that decision?
That is a sign of something wrong.
sadmanbarty
Well-known member
I'd say that there are two issues ensuring that you can still have disagreements among people of the highest moral and intellectual calibre with regards to the Iraq war (or a hypothetical one).
The first is the difficulty in deciphering casualty statistics (not just during the sanctions, but before the sanctions and after the invasion as well). They are of such a wide range that you could argue both sides; there were more deaths before the invasion or there were more deaths after the invasion.
The second is that there are so many reasonable counterfactuals, all of which have drastic implications on how many would have died in various scenarios.
droid
Well-known member
There is not a huge amount of difficulty. There's been a number of correlating reports.
The sanctions argument is frankly, obscene. What you're basically saying is: How many more people would have died if we continued starving them rather than burning their house down?
There is a simple moral truism. You are responsible for your actions and their consequences. Not for what might have happened in alternate realities.
sadmanbarty
Well-known member
It’s shamefully difficult to get hold of Iraqi public opinion, but here are a few interesting tidbits:
Feb. 2004
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/15_03_04_iraqsurvey.pdf
From todayís perspective and all things considered, was it absolutely right,
somewhat right, somewhat wrong or absolutely wrong that US-led coalition
forces invaded Iraq in Spring 2003?
Absolutely right 19.6
Somewhat right 28.6
Somewhat wrong 12.9
Absolutely wrong 26.2
Difficult to say 12.7
Total 100.0
Apart from right and wrong, do you feel the US-led coalition force invasionÖ
Base = All respondents
%
Humiliated Iraq 41.2
Liberated Iraq 41.8
Difficult to say 17.0
Total 100.0
March 2007
https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/168/37191.html
despite the horrendous personal security problems only 26% of the country preferred life under the previous regime of Saddam Hussein, with almost half (49%) preferring life under the current political system
2007
https://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/0319iraqpoll.pdf
Compared to our country as it was before the war in spring 2003, are things in Iraq
overall much better now, somewhat better, about the same, somewhat worse, or much worse?
2007 2005
% %
Much Better 11 22
Somewhat Better 27 24
About the Same 12 13
Somewhat Worse 30 21
Much Worse 20 18
Refused/don’t know – 2
From today’s perspective and all things considered, was it absolutely right, somewhat
right, somewhat wrong, or absolutely wrong that US-led coalition forces invaded Iraq in
spring 2003?
2007 2005 2004
% % %
Absolutely Right 22 19 20
Somewhat Right 25 28 29
Somewhat Wrong 19 17 13
Absolutely Wrong 34 33 26
Refused/don’t know - 4 13
March 08
https://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/0308opinion.pdf
From today’s perspective and all things considered, was it absolutely right, somewhat
right, somewhat wrong, or absolutely wrong that US-led coalition forces invaded Iraq in
spring 2003?
Mar08 Aug07 Feb07 2005 2004
% % % % %
Absolutely Right 21 12 22 19 20
Somewhat Right 28 25 25 28 29
Somewhat Wrong 23 28 19 17 13
Absolutely Wrong 27 35 34 33 26
Refused/don’t know - - - 4 13
Feb. 2004
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/15_03_04_iraqsurvey.pdf
From todayís perspective and all things considered, was it absolutely right,
somewhat right, somewhat wrong or absolutely wrong that US-led coalition
forces invaded Iraq in Spring 2003?
Absolutely right 19.6
Somewhat right 28.6
Somewhat wrong 12.9
Absolutely wrong 26.2
Difficult to say 12.7
Total 100.0
Apart from right and wrong, do you feel the US-led coalition force invasionÖ
Base = All respondents
%
Humiliated Iraq 41.2
Liberated Iraq 41.8
Difficult to say 17.0
Total 100.0
March 2007
https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/168/37191.html
despite the horrendous personal security problems only 26% of the country preferred life under the previous regime of Saddam Hussein, with almost half (49%) preferring life under the current political system
2007
https://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/0319iraqpoll.pdf
Compared to our country as it was before the war in spring 2003, are things in Iraq
overall much better now, somewhat better, about the same, somewhat worse, or much worse?
2007 2005
% %
Much Better 11 22
Somewhat Better 27 24
About the Same 12 13
Somewhat Worse 30 21
Much Worse 20 18
Refused/don’t know – 2
From today’s perspective and all things considered, was it absolutely right, somewhat
right, somewhat wrong, or absolutely wrong that US-led coalition forces invaded Iraq in
spring 2003?
2007 2005 2004
% % %
Absolutely Right 22 19 20
Somewhat Right 25 28 29
Somewhat Wrong 19 17 13
Absolutely Wrong 34 33 26
Refused/don’t know - 4 13
March 08
https://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/0308opinion.pdf
From today’s perspective and all things considered, was it absolutely right, somewhat
right, somewhat wrong, or absolutely wrong that US-led coalition forces invaded Iraq in
spring 2003?
Mar08 Aug07 Feb07 2005 2004
% % % % %
Absolutely Right 21 12 22 19 20
Somewhat Right 28 25 25 28 29
Somewhat Wrong 23 28 19 17 13
Absolutely Wrong 27 35 34 33 26
Refused/don’t know - - - 4 13
droid
Well-known member
Yeah, the full list with summaries is here: https://www.globalpolicy.org/invasion-and-war/iraqi-public-opinion-and-polls.html
Its not actually all that difficult to find out what Iraqi's think. ORB has been conducting detailed polls every year for at least the last decade. An interesting excerpt from their latest poll reveals that 85% of Iraqis think that 'ISIL is foreign American made'.
http://www.opinion.co.uk/perch/resources/iraqdata.pdf
They dont seem to have an archive on their site. I have a few of them downloaded somewhere.
Its not actually all that difficult to find out what Iraqi's think. ORB has been conducting detailed polls every year for at least the last decade. An interesting excerpt from their latest poll reveals that 85% of Iraqis think that 'ISIL is foreign American made'.
http://www.opinion.co.uk/perch/resources/iraqdata.pdf
They dont seem to have an archive on their site. I have a few of them downloaded somewhere.