johnlocke

In fact there was an organized military in Iraq. It wasn't effective and couldn't project conventional military power beyond Iraqi borders, but it did in fact exist.

The number of personnel in the Iraqi military prior to the war was uncertain, but it was believed to have been poorly-equipped.[57][58][59] The International Institute for Strategic Studies estimated the Iraqi armed forces to number 389,000 (army 350,000, navy 2,000, air force 20,000 and air defense 17,000), the paramilitary Fedayeen Saddam 44,000, and reserves 650,000.[60] Another estimate numbers the army and Republican Guard at between 280,000 to 350,000 and 50,000 to 80,000, respectively,[61] and the paramilitary between 20,000 and 40,000.[62] There were an estimated thirteen infantry divisions, ten mechanized and armored divisions, as well as some special forces units. The Iraqi Air Force and Iraqi Navy played a negligible role in the conflict.

2003 invasion of Iraq: Information and Much More from Answers.com

Advertising

Inkslinger

Thanks for pointing out that Iraq was no threat to America. You kinda proved yourself wrong there JL....

johnlocke

In fact, no. If you will look at my other posts (the shorter ones) you will see that I repeatedly said that I disagreed with the war in Iraq. I have always opposed it, and have never believed Iraq was a threat. That being the case, however, what you are speaking to (on that issue) is not the existance of the Iraqi military but rather to its effectiveness. The point being that the invasion does not constitute a terrorist act because it doesn't meet the criteria for a terrorist act. It was an act of war. A badly conceived and poorly implemented war of choice, but an act of war never-the-less.

mjollnir

Hey folks....long time no post. I had to chime in here. The OP is pretty much accurate. We have been waging wars....both covert and overt...since the end of WWII. Because of the rise of the influence of the MIC and the fact that most politicians profit from the MIC is what has given way to perpetual warfare. Why are we hated in the middle east?? If you think it's because of our freedoms or that OBL wants to make us all muslims, then say baaaaaaaa....because you are sheep. The American government has been conducting secret wars in the middle east because it's easier to take their natural resources rather than conduct business on the up and up. Back in the 50s, with the help of British Petroleum and the CIA, we toppled the elected prime minister of Iran because he was going to nationalize the oil fields. So we organize a bloody coup and install the Shah....who made Saddam look like a boyscout. That is just one example....so ask yourself again why do they hate us??

This is not about hating America...this is the greatest nation on the planet. However, our government has been ruling beyond the scope of the constitution for a very long time....all the while bullshitting us all that it's in our best interest. We need boogeymen. In the 60s, 70s and 80s it was the communists....even thought they were no threat to us here. Now it's radical Islam....a cause that we helped create with our foreign policy in that region. So keep on believing the shit being spewed at you by the media and our government. I love my country...the country that our founders created....not what it has become!

NO ONE will stone ANYONE until I blow this whistle. Even, and I want to make this perfectly clear, even if they DO say Jehovah!!!

Inkslinger

War based on lies and theft of another's resources? Hmm... Is there another word I can use for terrorism that would satisfy you? I can't think of a damned thing here....

johnlocke

It's a war of convenience. It's not terrorism and people need to stop calling it terrorism.

In so far as stealing the resources of another nation... why do you think wars are REALLY fought? BTW I don't mean "how they are sold".

There is no equivalence here, no rationale for justifying the attacks of 9/11, no affirmative defense. By equating Bush's boondoggle with terrorism you are, in effect, supporting the position that OBL and Al Queda were justified in the murder of more than 3,000 people. Is that REALLY where you want to hang your metaphorical hat?

johnlocke

Sure IT IS about hating America and it's sheer sophistry to argue otherwise. What this whole thread is about is exculpating OBL and Al Queda. It's about shifting the blame from the terrorists to the victims by saying that the attack of 9/11/2001 was an act of self defense. It's about concocting a rationale under which terrorists are absolved for murder by saying, by implication, that America deserved what happened.

As deplorable as American foreign policy is, and has been, it does NOT excuse the actions of Al Queda and OBL.

Arguing that this is about the lies of this administration is a smoke screen which gives people who want to excuse the actions of monsters some "cover" to say things that they know (or should know) to be wrong.

I am a long time opponent of the Bush administration. I am also a liberal and a democrat and frankly the willingness of some, on the extreme left, to excuse the acts of monsters absolutely baffles me. Some people are so intent on making the attacks of 9/11 the fault of America, that they ignore the fact that their argument falls flat for a very simple reason. The argument that this type of attack was either justified as self defense, or warranted as retaliation ignores the fact that the people killed were not agents or principals in the alleged first causes. It ignores the fact that the United States is neither unique nor is it evil in pursuing it's own national goals and objectives. EVERY sovereign nation acts in its own best interests and arguing that the U.S. should not do so demonstrates a quasi-suicidal ignorance of realpolitik. It also ignores the fact that there are other avenues for redress than murdering thousands of people. More to the point, the argument, by implication, that America somehow deserved this attack ignores the fact that fanatics need no rational reason for their actions... and Al Queda (and OBL) are fanatics.

This is not a summary dismissal of Islam, nor do I necessarily condone everything the US has done as a matter of foreign policy. What this response is, is a recognition that bad people do bad things and that they don't need justification. That is the case with Al Queda. Certainly you have a first amendment right to support the argument that the attack of 9/11 was justified. My question remains, is that REALLY where you want to hang your metaphorical hat?

mjollnir

I have never said, and I am sure the OP never hinted at it either, that I condone or have justified being attacked. And this is NOT about hating America. This is about the people opening their eyes to the shit that our government is and has been doing for decades...shit that is not only beyond the scope of the Constitution but also criminal! However, if you play with fire, you might get burned. And we have been feeding a powder keg. But most people don't want to hear the truth about the things our government does, so they just want to label enyone who speaks about it as anti-American. Nothing in any of my posts EVER justified the actions of 9/11.

As far as our national goals....you are right. ALL countries will act in what they believe is the best interest for their country. However, our government wants to tell you that they are helping and spreading democracy. We all know that is bullshit. We preach, but we do not practice what we preach. Of all the things hated by other cultures....hypocrisy is right at the top.

NO ONE will stone ANYONE until I blow this whistle. Even, and I want to make this perfectly clear, even if they DO say Jehovah!!!

johnlocke

I suggest you reread the OPs post, in its entirety. He most certainly DOES imply that the actions of AQ and OBL are justified. He goes to great lengths to excuse their actions and to shift blame from them to America. Here are exceprts of his talking points:

American government is responsible for that day…Americans attacked Muslims in Somalia…Americans steal their wealth…American forces occupy Muslim countries…American government has starved the Muslims of Iraq,.. American government has supported the Jews .. the American people are the ones who choose their government by way of their own free will; a choice which stems from their agreement to its policies. …The American people are the ones who pay the taxes which fund the planes that bomb Afghanistan, the tanks that strike and destroy homes in Palestine, the armies which occupy lands in the Arabian Gulf, and the fleets which ensure the blockade of Iraq...the American army is part of the American people. The American people are the ones who employ both their men and their women in the American Forces which attack them…This is why the American people cannot be not innocent of all the crimes committed by the Americans and Jews against them.

In his argument he conflates the American people with the American government and the American military. Net result is that he is implying that the interchangability of these terms equated to legitimacy in targetting them.

In his argument he says that the American people can not be innocent of all the crimes committed by the Americans (government and military) thereby establishing the intent to legitimize the actions of AQ and OBL as well as to transfer blame for the attacks of 9/11 from them to the American people. This is a blatant appeal to the argument "America deserved this attack."

In his argument the OP lists a long series of events which he uses as a (false) basis for an implied justification defense.

Perhaps you might put aside your dislike for this administration long enough to realize that the enemy of your enemy is not necessarily your friend.

deedee

Applause....