More Replies to Common Bitches About Iraq
Lefty #1: Is Nixon your Hero? Should everyone have left his staff alone, in order to be more "positive" in their energy expenditure? If so, then clearly Watergate would never have turned into a political scandal. Would that have been OK by you?
SPR3TS: Nixon's staff broke into Democratic headquarters. A criminal assault on democracy. They deserved what they got. The Bush admin is guilty of lying to sell it's policy. If lying were illegal, our prisons would be full of politicians from both sides. Bush deserved to lose the election for this, but the opposition wasn't up to the task, a bit too much lying and manipulating of the facts themselves.
Lefty #1: You're still speaking/writing as if Bush and his staff were simply honestly wrong, and you're assuming that no new evidence will ever turn up about Bush's crimes. News flash: if the "negative" people are correct, then Bush's crimes turn Watergate and Monicagate into true child's play.
SPR3TS: Hey, I said previously that I do not "excuse the way Bush made the case for war, which was wrong in many ways." To be more clear, I agree with you that they were not simply honestly wrong. They were intentionally deceitful and that was infinitely more damaging than Monicagate, which was a non-issue (I won't try to compare Iraq-gate to Watergate...Apples and Oranges). I'm with Senator Lieberman, the British Conservatives, The Economist, John Kerry (sometimes), and others who think it was OK to take out Saddam, but that the methodology was wrong. I wish Bush hadn't run for re-election. OK. But there will be no crime found in what the Bush Admin did to go to war. It's the President's prerogative ...as many politicians do...to arrange the facts to fit their policy. Manipulating intelligence in making a case for war is despicable, much worse than run of the mill political lying, but it's not prosecutable. The guy was re-elected. We're in Iraq, and whether you like it or not, bashing the Admin's actions two years ago makes the situation worse for all. So I wish folks would get off it and move on.
Lefty #2: The Iraqis overwhelmingly want the US to leave too. Do you believe in that poll?
SPR3TS: A qualified yes. Based on last year's polling data, which is the latest I am aware of, and which probably applies still today:
If the Coalition left Iraq today, would you feel more safe of less safe:
More safe: 28%
Less safe: 53%
Regarding attack against the Iraqi police, do you agree or disagree that the attacks emphasize the need for the continued presence of Coalition forces in Iraq:
Agree: 51%
Disagree: 34%
Asked straight up if they want coalition forces to leave:
Immediately, say in the next few months: 57%
They should stay in Iraq longer: 36%
So more Iraqis "want" the coalition to leave than "want" them to stay, but for fear of what would happen if the coalition leaves, they don't ask or force the coalition to leave. The irony, of course is that the coalition wants to leave too, as soon as it's safe for the Iraqis.
Lefty #2: Do you believe, if polled after the Americans leave, the Iraqis would be better off?
SPR3TS: Not if the US withdraws today. On one hand, the presence of the US encourages the terrorists and other violent types. On the other hand, the coalition keeps the violent, anti-democratic forces from building a base of power and gives the peaceful political process the security needed for a chance to succeed. I believe civil war would result from a pre-mature withdrawal, and the number of Iraqis being killed today (with the coalition present) would pale in comparison to the casualties in a civil war.
This is the question for all the critics of the Bush admin, especially those decrying the humanitarian situation: What would you do at this point? Withdraw? What would be the result?
Lefty #2: The Iraqis would have been better off overthrowing Saddam on their own without being tainted by the Americans.
SPR3TS: That wasn't going to happen.
Poll question to Iraqis: Do you think Saddam would have been removed from power by Iraqis themselves:
Yes: 4%
No: 89%
Lefty #2: In order to be right, you have to be a firm believer in the theory that the end justifies the means. But does it, if we leave aside the empirical results and focus on the ethics of the assertion? Some processes are beyond justification.
SPR3TS: I don't have a firm rule about "the end justifies the means". Sometimes they might, sometimes not. I think morality lies in intention, not results. What do the Iraqis think?
Also from last year's poll:
Thinking about any hardships you might have suffered since the US, Britain invasion, do you personally think that ousting Saddam Hussein was worth it or not?
Yes: 61%
No: 28%
The US-British military action in Iraq:
Cannot be justified at all: 39%
Cannot be justified, somewhat: 13%
Sometimes yes, sometimes no: 16%
Can be justified, somewhat: 19%
Can be justified completely: 12%
Attacks and bombings targeting Iraqi police:
Cannot be justified at all: 81%
Cannot be justified, somewhat: 11%
The situation of you and your family compared with before the US and British invasion:
Much better: 14%
Somewhat better: 37%
About the same: 25%
Somewhat worse off: 15%
Much worse off: 10%
SPR3TS: Nixon's staff broke into Democratic headquarters. A criminal assault on democracy. They deserved what they got. The Bush admin is guilty of lying to sell it's policy. If lying were illegal, our prisons would be full of politicians from both sides. Bush deserved to lose the election for this, but the opposition wasn't up to the task, a bit too much lying and manipulating of the facts themselves.
Lefty #1: You're still speaking/writing as if Bush and his staff were simply honestly wrong, and you're assuming that no new evidence will ever turn up about Bush's crimes. News flash: if the "negative" people are correct, then Bush's crimes turn Watergate and Monicagate into true child's play.
SPR3TS: Hey, I said previously that I do not "excuse the way Bush made the case for war, which was wrong in many ways." To be more clear, I agree with you that they were not simply honestly wrong. They were intentionally deceitful and that was infinitely more damaging than Monicagate, which was a non-issue (I won't try to compare Iraq-gate to Watergate...Apples and Oranges). I'm with Senator Lieberman, the British Conservatives, The Economist, John Kerry (sometimes), and others who think it was OK to take out Saddam, but that the methodology was wrong. I wish Bush hadn't run for re-election. OK. But there will be no crime found in what the Bush Admin did to go to war. It's the President's prerogative ...as many politicians do...to arrange the facts to fit their policy. Manipulating intelligence in making a case for war is despicable, much worse than run of the mill political lying, but it's not prosecutable. The guy was re-elected. We're in Iraq, and whether you like it or not, bashing the Admin's actions two years ago makes the situation worse for all. So I wish folks would get off it and move on.
Lefty #2: The Iraqis overwhelmingly want the US to leave too. Do you believe in that poll?
SPR3TS: A qualified yes. Based on last year's polling data, which is the latest I am aware of, and which probably applies still today:
If the Coalition left Iraq today, would you feel more safe of less safe:
More safe: 28%
Less safe: 53%
Regarding attack against the Iraqi police, do you agree or disagree that the attacks emphasize the need for the continued presence of Coalition forces in Iraq:
Agree: 51%
Disagree: 34%
Asked straight up if they want coalition forces to leave:
Immediately, say in the next few months: 57%
They should stay in Iraq longer: 36%
So more Iraqis "want" the coalition to leave than "want" them to stay, but for fear of what would happen if the coalition leaves, they don't ask or force the coalition to leave. The irony, of course is that the coalition wants to leave too, as soon as it's safe for the Iraqis.
Lefty #2: Do you believe, if polled after the Americans leave, the Iraqis would be better off?
SPR3TS: Not if the US withdraws today. On one hand, the presence of the US encourages the terrorists and other violent types. On the other hand, the coalition keeps the violent, anti-democratic forces from building a base of power and gives the peaceful political process the security needed for a chance to succeed. I believe civil war would result from a pre-mature withdrawal, and the number of Iraqis being killed today (with the coalition present) would pale in comparison to the casualties in a civil war.
This is the question for all the critics of the Bush admin, especially those decrying the humanitarian situation: What would you do at this point? Withdraw? What would be the result?
Lefty #2: The Iraqis would have been better off overthrowing Saddam on their own without being tainted by the Americans.
SPR3TS: That wasn't going to happen.
Poll question to Iraqis: Do you think Saddam would have been removed from power by Iraqis themselves:
Yes: 4%
No: 89%
Lefty #2: In order to be right, you have to be a firm believer in the theory that the end justifies the means. But does it, if we leave aside the empirical results and focus on the ethics of the assertion? Some processes are beyond justification.
SPR3TS: I don't have a firm rule about "the end justifies the means". Sometimes they might, sometimes not. I think morality lies in intention, not results. What do the Iraqis think?
Also from last year's poll:
Thinking about any hardships you might have suffered since the US, Britain invasion, do you personally think that ousting Saddam Hussein was worth it or not?
Yes: 61%
No: 28%
The US-British military action in Iraq:
Cannot be justified at all: 39%
Cannot be justified, somewhat: 13%
Sometimes yes, sometimes no: 16%
Can be justified, somewhat: 19%
Can be justified completely: 12%
Attacks and bombings targeting Iraqi police:
Cannot be justified at all: 81%
Cannot be justified, somewhat: 11%
The situation of you and your family compared with before the US and British invasion:
Much better: 14%
Somewhat better: 37%
About the same: 25%
Somewhat worse off: 15%
Much worse off: 10%
posted by ML at
9:03 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home