Hindsight being 20/20

[livendive 8]

Imagine you could go back 5 years and it was your decision whether or not the US invades Iraq. If you knew it would turn out like this, would you or would you not trade 3000 US lives (and thousands of Iraqi lives) in order to remove Saddam from office and execute him.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[quade 4]

No. He was contained and no immediate threat to the US.

I said so at that time, but will admit that I was willing at the time to see if what Powell had said at the UN was true or not. Sadly, it wasn't.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Skyrad 0]

No, I thought it was bullshit then and my opinion hasn't changed. I thought it would turn into America's Northern Ireland and it has.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[JohnRich 4]

A poll using the advantage of "hindsight" is irrelevant.

When events happen, you don't have perfect future hindsight with which to make your choices. Knowledge is imperfect. You make the best choices you can with what information you have. No one knows what the actual outcome will later be.

[rushmc 23]

Choices are kind of leading dont you think?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[skydyvr 0]

I would go back and NOT invade.

I was one of those who actually believed the bullshit, much to my chagrin now.

. . =(_8^(1)

[livendive 8]

Quote

Choices are kind of leading dont you think?

They're not worded exactly opposite of each other, which was a mistake, but they're also not terribly biased. If you were given the option of sacrificing 3000 service members for Saddam's removal from office and execution, you either would or would not take it. Which is it?

Personally, I would not.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Choices are kind of leading dont you think?

They're not worded exactly opposite of each other, which was a mistake, but they're also not terribly biased. If you were given the option of sacrificing 3000 service members for Saddam's removal from office and execution, you either would or would not take it. Which is it?

Personally, I would not.

Blues,
Dave

You did it again.

...sacrificing 3000 .........

Care to try again?

Dont you see you framed the pole in a way that anyone disagreeing with you does not have a choice they can make?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Amazon 7]

Quote

I would go back and NOT invade.

I was against it then... and voiced it so. Several people called me a terrorist supporter at that time for doing so.


I felt there was another war... that needed to be finished first.. it still needs to be finished.. but now I dont think it ever will be because of what this administration did in Iraq.

We lost our moral high ground... AND the support of the world that we had in 2001 and early 2002 for our going after Al Queda and their buddies the Taliban. There should have been no place on earth we should have allowed them to escape to.....period.

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

A poll using the advantage of "hindsight" is irrelevant.

When events happen, you don't have perfect future hindsight with which to make your choices. Knowledge is imperfect. You make the best choices you can with what information you have. No one knows what the actual outcome will later be.

Well, John, Some of us didn't need hindsight to know that we were being fed lies by the administration.

More

More

More

Your problem, John, is that you never recognized that the "compassionate conservatives" you voted for were a bunch of self-serving liars.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

....and you form your opinions from "info" from sites like the Demunderground and daily kooks.....

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

....and you form your opinions from "info" from sites like the Demunderground and daily kooks.....

Don't read them, but if they were CORRECT as well, they were much more astute than you were.

In fact, even with hindsight you still get it wrong.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

....and you form your opinions from "info" from sites like the Demunderground and daily kooks.....

Don't read them, but if they were CORRECT as well, they were much more astute than you were.

In fact, even with hindsight you still get it wrong.

Probalby

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Choices are kind of leading dont you think?

They're not worded exactly opposite of each other, which was a mistake, but they're also not terribly biased. If you were given the option of sacrificing 3000 service members for Saddam's removal from office and execution, you either would or would not take it. Which is it?

Personally, I would not.

Blues,
Dave

You did it again.

...sacrificing 3000 .........

Care to try again?

Dont you see you framed the pole in a way that anyone disagreeing with you does not have a choice they can make?

What word would you prefer I use in my question? Note that it's my question, you don't get to change it to a totally different question.

Rephrased again: If you knew what deposing and executing Saddam was going to cost in terms of lives (and money for that matter), would you consider the cause worth of the price tag and do it all over again? On one hand you have 3000 living US service members. On the other hand you have Saddam still in power in Iraq. You can choose to kill none of them or kill all of them. Which would you choose?

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Skyrad 0]

Quote

A poll using the advantage of "hindsight" is irrelevant.

When events happen, you don't have perfect future hindsight with which to make your choices. Knowledge is imperfect. You make the best choices you can with what information you have. No one knows what the actual outcome will later be.

I disagree, as Kalend said, some of us new and voiced our concern right from the start. I predicted the mess Iraq has become, and that no WMDs existed at the time of the invasion, it wasn't a lucky guess. My prediction was based on the intelligence available at the time a knowledge of the culture of the Arabs and the lessons from history in the region along with the science. Anyone who really wanted to know the truth could have.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=197415#197415

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2491100#2491100

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=323221#323221

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=463216#463216

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Imagine you could go back 5 years and it was your decision whether or not the US invades Iraq. If you knew it would turn out like this, would you or would you not trade 3000 US lives (and thousands of Iraqi lives) in order to remove Saddam from office and execute him.

Dave, your description is not accurate.

We did not trade 3000+ US lives to remove him and execute him. That cost considerably fewer lives.

The trade of 3000 was to attempt nation building, which was not necessary if the goal was just to remove Saddam.

I still would have removed him, would have left in 2004, right when many of you insisted we had to stick around and trade more lives.

[rushmc 23]

Hindsight being 20/20 should we have gone into Iraq?

Yes

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[livendive 8]

Quote

Hindsight being 20/20 should we have gone into Iraq?

Yes

So you think what we've gained is worth what it has cost?

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Hindsight being 20/20 should we have gone into Iraq?

Yes

So you think what we've gained is worth what it has cost?

Blues,
Dave

Yes

I lost someone overthere I consider family so I do not say this lightly/

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Hindsight being 20/20 should we have gone into Iraq?

Yes

So you think what we've gained is worth what it has cost?

Blues,
Dave

To follow up, I do not think that the only way we can look at was has happened is in a rear view mirror.
This issue is more forward looking than back.

I also think that 15 years from now, when records are released and declassifed is the only time we will know for sure.

Lawrocket had the best post on this a while back. Everybody in the houses knew what was going on and why. Do I think we were told the truth? In part but I think more it was a bad sales job. The reasons were condensed and framed poorly. Add the politics, and, well, we get the rhetoric we have today..... .... ... from both sides

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SimonBones 1]

Quote

Dave, your description is not accurate.

We did not trade 3000+ US lives to remove him and execute him. That cost considerably fewer lives.

The trade of 3000 was to attempt nation building, which was not necessary if the goal was just to remove Saddam.

I still would have removed him, would have left in 2004, right when many of you insisted we had to stick around and trade more lives.

I agree with Kelp here. Using a number like 3000 is a bit of a twist. More accurately would be to use a number from initial invasion to the capture of Sadam based on your original question. I bet that number is far from 3000. After that point, how much can you blame on the slow progress in building the new government and them trying to take their time and milk us for every dollar and resource they can get.

According to http://antiwar.com/casualties/ there were only 306 combat related deaths in that nine month period.

On average the military suffers almost 300 off duty fatalities per year in privately owned vehicle accidents alone.

Not saying that it's great to kill 306 people, but your numbers tend to misrepresent the truth.

108 way head down world record!!!
http://www.simonbones.com
Hit me up on Facebook

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

Imagine you could go back 5 years and it was your decision whether or not the US invades Iraq. If you knew it would turn out like this, would you or would you not trade 3000 US lives (and thousands of Iraqi lives) in order to remove Saddam from office and execute him.

Dave, your description is not accurate.

We did not trade 3000+ US lives to remove him and execute him. That cost considerably fewer lives.

The trade of 3000 was to attempt nation building, which was not necessary if the goal was just to remove Saddam.

I still would have removed him, would have left in 2004, right when many of you insisted we had to stick around and trade more lives.

While you have a good point, I think we became morally obligated to the Iraqi people when we invaded their country and removed their government, so the rebuilding can't really be considered a separate and distinct action. It's just cleaning up the mess we made, kind of like doing the dishes after cooking dinner...part & parcel to the project.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[SimonBones 1]

You can call it moral obligation. I'll agree with you. Even still, we didn't have to. Sticking around was a completely separate decision presented to congress repeatedly. Given our presence in Germany and Japan still, nobody can deny knowing what the decision to stick around and rebuild would entail. I wouldn't call that part hindsight really. Congress never put together the vote to leave Iraq. We elect congress members every two years. If that's what the people wanted, they could have done it. We voted for the people who voted to stick around knowing it would take years and thousands of more lives to do so. Yeah, not really hindsight at all.

108 way head down world record!!!
http://www.simonbones.com
Hit me up on Facebook

[PLFXpert 0]

No.

I didn't think then, nor do I now, we should invade Iraq.

I'm happy Saddam is gone.

I don't think we should pull out now all willy-nilly.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

I don't think we should pull out now all willy-nilly.

Personally I dont think that the last US soldier that will die in Iraq................... has even been born yet.