The Iraq War

More Than Mortal · April 03, 2015, 02:37:58 PM

The Coalition is not to blame for the current state of ISIS.

challengerX · April 03, 2015, 02:52:27 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Anonymous (User Deleted) · April 03, 2015, 09:10:00 PM

Quote from: challengerX on April 03, 2015, 02:13:25 PM

The problem is you're acting like it was a bad thing to invade and remove Saddam. It wasn't.

But Turkey, Mordo, and Meta, you guys are wrong for thinking this was some sort of righteous war. It wasn't. It was about oil and money.

...Yeah, you're right. Especially with the points Meta brought up, I didn't realize what a shitlord that Saddam was. I mean maybe it's illegal but even if it was, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's wrong.

Quote from: SexyBarracuda on April 03, 2015, 02:10:09 PM

damage cuntroll

;_;

Quote from: Meta Cognition on April 03, 2015, 02:16:14 PM

And my point is I don't care.

You have no idea how validated I feel right now, holy shit

That's exactly the reason why you're wrong. You've adopted a preposterously narrow view of what counts as 'justified war' that you conveniently disregard or claim to 'acknowledge' it simply because saying so forwards your argument, but then nothing else you say actually sustains that claim.

I wish I had been more serious two posts ago, because I actually brought up a valid point:

Quote

But let's be honest--it's so flipping convoluted that it's obvious we're never going to convince each other who's right or wrong. We're picking apart arguments like it's fucking Operation and completely missing the bigger picture.

And it's true, we did miss the bigger picture: you decided from the outset that most claims against the war are of little concern. You already decided you were right, and you weren't going to let facts or logic get in the way of that. My argument fell on deaf ears.

It's partisan fuckery at its finest. No wonder I was losing the argument--I'm outnumbered 3 to 1 with folks who, by your own admission, are going to ignore the overwhelming wealth of facts that proves them wrong. And then when someone sees the futility in arguing against an echo chamber/circlejerk, you declare 'victory' and tell that lone person that they are the one who's wrong and should go somewhere where they can hear agreeing opinions. There's a lot of irony in that.

As far as I can tell, my pros/cons list of the Iraq war has remained largely unchallenged. Apparently, you've decided ahead of time that most of the cons are simply irrelevant. You're going to claim again that you're 'not ignoring it' but you've proven that it simply isn't true.

You're a fucking joke. The three of you, really--any respect I had for you died with this thread.

gats · April 04, 2015, 04:29:49 AM

Quote from: TheFox on April 03, 2015, 06:59:02 AM

no, saddam had wmds and we liberated people. war is always justified.

lol

challengerX · April 04, 2015, 04:49:35 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Not Comms Officer · April 04, 2015, 05:36:32 AM

Quote from: gats on April 01, 2015, 07:50:11 PM

JET FUEL CANT MELT SAND BEAMS

JET FUEL CAN'T MELT THE PURE, REFINED WILL OF THE MUJAHIDEEN

Not Comms Officer · April 04, 2015, 05:42:03 AM

Quote from: challengerX on April 03, 2015, 02:23:12 PM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on April 03, 2015, 02:16:14 PM
Quote from: challengerX on April 03, 2015, 02:13:25 PM
It was about oil and money.
And my point is I don't care.

Don't get me wrong, it's a horrible motivation to go to war, and its led to countless atrocities in other places like Rwanda and Darfur. But we're just talking about the general motivations among pro-war advocates (like Turkey and I) as opposed to just the motivations of the Administration.

As I've said, Blair and Bush were both fucking awful, especially in their hype and lies. But, honestly, it doesn't bother me all that much. I'm just glad we got to see Saddam in the dock and Iraq no longer under his yoke.
Right, but I don't want to see a single one of you say we got rid of a genocidal maniac and liberated Iraq when it's under arguably worse conditions now. Saddam was trying to exterminate Shia and Kurds? So are ISIS. Hell, they've destroyed humanity's ancient history.

So don't give me this shit about Iraq being better off. It's not. Even if we had stayed there ISIS would've been rampaging. We would have never been able to leave. America and Britain committed too many serious mistakes and there's just nothing we can do.

It's up to the Arabs and Iranians to get their shit together. Fat chance.

You should read up about what's going on in Tikrit now that the ISF has "liberated" it.

So much looting. Literally from one brutal occupier to the next.

More Than Mortal · April 04, 2015, 06:15:59 AM

Quote from: Kupo on April 03, 2015, 09:10:00 PM

And it's true, we did miss the bigger picture: you decided from the outset that most claims against the war are of little concern.

No. No, I didn't. What I said to Challenger just then, and what I've been saying to you throughout this entire thread, is that the U.S. motivations for going into Iraq are something worth discussing and criticising, but they don't outweigh the positive consequences of the war. I'm not sat here thinking "Anything Kupo says is worthless".

Let me put it as simply as I can. The US motivations of the war exist within the sphere of general motivations for the war. And is connected to the general consequences of the war which in turn contains the consequences specifically for the US. My argument is that the negative content in the two US spheres doesn't outweigh the positive content of the spheres taken as a whole. Is that finally clear?

It's also really funny that you're accusing me of taking a narrow view, since most of your arguments against the Iraq War have been about the negative consequences for the US and the UK. You're going to have to forgive me if I actually care about the well-being of the Iraqis and the Kurds. Maybe you feel as if your cons hadn't been addressed, because I was too busy actually enunciating the pros that you wilfully misrepresented:

Quote

Let's not underplay these issues here. A much wanted war criminal was put on trial, the Kurdish and Shiite majority were rescued from the threat of renewed genocide from a State apparatus with a proven record of such intentions, people weren't fucking murdered for owning a satellite dish, the Mesopotamian Marshes have recovered, fresh oilfields were found and investments made, a federal state was established until Nouri al-Maliki fucked it up with his sectarianism, the Kurds were provided their own semblance of self-government and Qaddafi likely wouldn't have handed over his stockpile which allowed us to trace the network and accomplish what is probably the biggest anti-proliferation victory to date.

And you want to compare this with Abu Ghraib and say it wasn't worth it? What the fuck are you smoking? You really want to try and balance something like 3,800 unfortunately and wrongly tortured prisoners with hundreds of thousands of murders, a lot of which with chemical weaponry?

Why are we to blame for the instability clearly exacerbated by fundamentalist militants and their delusionally theocratic and pornographic views of what the world should be like? You need to ask yourself what a post-Saddam Iraq would look like without a coalition present. The Sunni-Shia sectarianism that exploded because of al-Maliki's idiocy? Nothing to temper it. The Jihadists already there would've been active and without proper opposition, even if they weren't funded by Iran. And Iran, by the way, probably would've pushed its own interests harder for the Shi'a majority, maybe even with some involvement from Hezbollah. The Saudis, of course, would have their own vested interests in the Sunni minority--and of course Iraq being a keystone oil state. And then the Turks would be stroking their wet fundamentalist cunts over the prospects Kurdistan afforded them.

Before you acuse anyone of "partisan fuckery", you need to take a long, hard look in the goddamn mirror for either wilfully missing this, or being stupid enough to. Except where you've been explicitly incorrect, I've accepted your cons. Yes, Bush was a moron and a liar and Blair was his lap-dog. And of course you're going to think I've prejudged the arguments when you don't even seem to understand the pro arguments in the first place.

This is what it comes down to, you condensed three paragraphs of important information into:

Quote

-Saddam go bye-bye (but for some reason Iraq is the only time this will happen, because non-reasons)
-Look, we found a penny WMDs that did not fit the adminstration's narrative and were consequently covered up, thus denying troops necessary medical treatment
-Oh, and a slight majority the Iraqis feel good about the economy

So, pick your poison. Were you being prejudicially partisan, or just ignorant?

Quote

The three of you, really--any respect I had for you died with this thread.

I don't care, you arrogant fuck. If you're really going to let an argument about a war change your perception of a person, then that's your problem not ours. I may be strident, but at least I don't throw my toys out of the pram when I disagree with people.

Mordo · April 04, 2015, 06:37:29 AM

Quote from: challengerX on April 04, 2015, 04:49:35 AM

Quote from: Kupo on April 03, 2015, 09:10:00 PM
You're a fucking joke. The three of you, really--any respect I had for you died with this thread.
I have to admit, you guys have been very disrespectful and started jacking each other off when he decided to stop responding.

That's isn't how you have a civilized conversation, and though you may not have been calling Kupo anything, but you might as well have. I expect it from Mordo and Turkey, but I'm disappointed in you Meta.

Disrespectful? Please highlight anywhere in this thread, especially me, where we resorted to personalised ad hominem attacks, because I'd really like to know. And for someone that regularly engages in that sort of behavior himself when things start getting a little abrasive, you're really in no position to talk.

It's simply a heated discussion. Kupo couldn't take said heat, so went full damage control, and now he's throwing a temper tantrum because he couldn't get his last reply. You could call it "ganging up on" if you want, but if anyone's being immature here, it's Kupo.

Mordo · April 04, 2015, 06:39:08 AM

Quote from: Kupo on April 03, 2015, 09:10:00 PM

challengerX · April 04, 2015, 06:57:52 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

challengerX · April 04, 2015, 07:10:33 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Mordo · April 04, 2015, 07:28:20 AM

Quote from: challengerX on April 04, 2015, 06:57:52 AM

Telling him to fuck off to Reddit is respectful? lolok

Yeah, because those were the exact words I used right enough.

Quote

I welcome you to dig through my post history and highlight where I've done that apart from "discussions" with Kinder.

These are just some excerpts from the Trayvon Martin discussion we had:

Quote

No. I clearly said I don't blame him for calling the cops. Do you have reading comprehension problems or are you stupid? What the fuck?

Quote

Who knew a hoody was damning evidence? Fuck off.

Social Conservatism thread:

Quote

Nah I'd just laugh at you for being a retard.

Quote

I know you struggle to keep up with even basic economic jargon in Meta's threads, but that doesn't mean you need to bring your ignorance in here

Need I go on?

And yeah, I'm probably equally as guilty for being a sanctimonious asshole in other threads as well, but at least I can admit it and not commit flagrant hypocrisy at the same time.

Quote

He has valid points and you guys don't exactly have great rebuttals to them.

Idk about you, but I wouldn't really consider blatant strawman and irrelevant arguments "valid points"

Quote

Then when he decides to stop posting (a bit hysterically I'll agree), you guys all mock him. Pretty weak, but like I said I expect it from you and Turkey.

There's a difference between mocking someone and trying to point out their erroneous arguments. You're only defending him because his political opinions align with yours. Replace Kupo with Kinder and I guarantee you'd have absolutely no problem "ganging up" on him as well. In fact, I'd probably wager you'd be the biggest instigator.

Flee · April 04, 2015, 07:37:53 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Turkey · April 04, 2015, 09:44:27 AM

Quote from: challengerX on April 04, 2015, 06:57:52 AM

Then when he decides to stop posting (a bit hysterically I'll agree), you guys all mock him. Pretty weak, but like I said I expect it from you and Turkey.

If you expected it, why are you throwing a fit? Kupo has been repeatedly rebutted in his major claims throughout this thread, and continues to defend them ad nauseam. Compared to his trainwreck of an "I give up" post, our responses were tame.

challengerX · April 04, 2015, 02:02:35 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

challengerX · April 04, 2015, 02:08:06 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Mordo · April 04, 2015, 02:18:48 PM

Flee, just lock the thread. I have no patience to debate ignorance anymore.

Turkey · April 04, 2015, 02:27:05 PM

Quote from: challengerX on April 04, 2015, 02:08:06 PM

]Like I said, I don't agree with Kupo and I think he's wrong on a lot of points. As are you.

Such as?

challengerX · April 04, 2015, 02:34:01 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

challengerX · April 04, 2015, 02:35:53 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Turkey · April 04, 2015, 03:06:57 PM

Quote from: challengerX on April 04, 2015, 02:35:53 PM

The point is I don't really care, otherwise I would've debated further. But what I'm saying is the way you guys are acting is childish.

So you're inserting yourself into a debate which you don't even care about nor will you defend your claims, to protest the way that three of us have been responding towards someone who refuses to acknowledge evidence against his own position and from the beginning repeatedly used personal insults culminating in a rant in which he said our "opinions are shit", to which we responded with mild teasing?

I don't even know what you're doing in this thread. Your typical behavior on here, whether you like it or not, doesn't give you much of a position to call our actions childish. Yeah Meta got out of hand a bit (and I pointed that out), but this is just pointless. Kupo is a big boy perfectly capable of handling himself. Now if you're not going to continue the discussion of topic (as I tried to get you to do), please just stop posting in here so this thread doesn't get locked.

challengerX · April 04, 2015, 03:14:04 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Turkey · April 04, 2015, 03:34:14 PM

Quote from: challengerX on April 04, 2015, 03:14:04 PM

No, I have absolutely no interest in debating Iraq with you or Mordo.

Bye, then. You inserted yourself into a heated but still largely respectful discussion and created drama where there was very little.

I actually agree with you on some aspects, though. You say the war was fought for oil, and my first post in this thread said the very same thing, though we have different perspectives on it. In fact, I'd be one of the first on this board to say that there really aren't any wars of ideology between nations (Meta would be the first to call me out for saying that), and that securing stable oil economies is a justified reason to oust a tyrant.

More Than Mortal · April 04, 2015, 03:37:22 PM

Quote from: EasterTurkey on April 04, 2015, 03:34:14 PM

In fact, I'd be one of the first on this board to say that there really aren't any wars of ideology between nations, and that securing stable oil economies is a justified reason to oust a tyrant (and Meta would be the first to call me out for saying that).

Only the first part.

Oil is a legitimate reason to start a war if there's a threat of the world economy being crippled.

challengerX · April 04, 2015, 03:39:40 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Turkey · April 04, 2015, 03:48:47 PM

Quote from: challengerX on April 04, 2015, 03:39:40 PM

It's not exactly bad to fight a war for oil.

Just don't act like it was about removing Saddam and freedom.

Removing Saddam and maintaining economic security are not mutually exclusive; in fact, the latter required the former. Thus the justification for war.

challengerX · April 04, 2015, 03:52:29 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Anonymous (User Deleted) · April 05, 2015, 10:27:21 AM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on April 04, 2015, 06:15:59 AM

Let me put it as simply as I can. The US motivations of the war exist within the sphere of general motivations for the war. And is connected to the general consequences of the war which in turn contains the consequences specifically for the US. My argument is that the negative content in the two US spheres doesn't outweigh the positive content of the spheres taken as a whole. Is that finally clear?

Your argument has been to 'not care' about the primary reasons why the war was waged, and engage in what I can only think of as cherrypicking at best, historical revisionism at worst. You can't just choose the reasons that you wanted them to be.

Today's ISIS does exist in part due to the invasion of Iraq, and the US did indeed use 9/11 as justification for the invasion. I hope that finally puts your denial of those facts to rest.

More Than Mortal · April 05, 2015, 11:01:33 AM

Quote from: Kupo on April 05, 2015, 10:27:21 AM

Your argument has been to 'not care' about the primary reasons why the war was waged, and engage in what I can only think of as cherrypicking at best, historical revisionism at worst.

I honestly don't know any other way of explaining to you why you're completely wrong about my position on Iraq. You are the one conflating support for the war with slavish, Bushite neoconsevatism.

Quote

You can't just choose the reasons that you wanted them to be.

Sorry? Funnily enough I can choose my own reasons for supporting the war. If you don't like the fact that they lie outside of your narrow, U.S.-centric view. . . I really don't give a crap.