Operation Told You So: looking back at Iraq war debate

[dorkulon]

http://www.buffalobeast.com/95/operationtoldyouso.htm

Operation Told You So
No one could have anticipated the Iraq disaster, except the 40% who did
Allan Uthman

<snip>

It seems that the country has finally caught up to the farcical stupidity of this war. It’s like everybody’s waking up from a hypnotic trance under which they were homicidal zombies, rubbing their eyes and saying, “where am I?” And when told, they can’t believe it. “Me? I would never do a thing like that.”

They say that, after Watergate, you couldn’t find anyone who would admit they had voted for Nixon. I suspect we’re going to see a similar phenomenon with Iraq. How many people want to admit they supported the dumbest war in modern American history? At least, when we got to Vietnam, there were really communists there. We weren’t running around desperate to find anybody with a copy of The Marx-Engels Reader so we could announce it on TV.

But some of the majority who did at least temporarily support the war don’t enjoy the luxury of plausible deniability—namely, the opinion-makers who convinced so many that Saddam would be crawling out of their toilets with a vial of anthrax clenched in his teeth any second. All you have to do if you want to see just how wrong right-wingers were is read some columns from the run-up to the war. It’s amazing these people are still able to show their faces in public without being repeatedly slapped.

<snip>

But now that nearly everyone has figured out that this was an incredible, criminal mistake, some of them have changed their minds. Conservative luminaries like William F. Buckley, George Will, Francis Fukuyama, and Andrew Sullivan have all admitted that the war was a mistake, or at least handled incredibly badly. But none of them have gone the extra mile. It’s one thing to admit you were wrong—something a lot of conservatives seem genetically incapable of, so they’re ahead of the pack there. But it is quite another to admit someone else was right. And that’s something none of these guys are about to do.

But it hardly matters. The fact is they were wrong. They were wrong, and the wussy, unpatriotic, “pre-9/11 mentality” liberals were right.

<snip>

http://www.buffalobeast.com/95/operationtoldyouso.htm

[Mythsaje]

1. I must have said this a thousand times

during the run up to the war.

"It does require a lot more troops to occupy a nation than to invade it."

I figured the war itself would be fairly easy, as such things go. But I knew occupation would be a whole different kettle of man-eating beetles and anyone who didn't realize that was operating without the barest hint of a clue.

It was the run-up that caused me to throw up my hands and walk away in disgust with the corporate media. My bullshit detector was screaming like an air-raid siren and far, far too many people had pulled the batteries out of their own.

[mike_c]

2. EXCELLENT ARTICLE!! K&R 1000 times....

Even among liberals this inability to admit that others were right about Iraq persists, e.g. among those who still insist that dems only voted for the IWR "to put pressure on Saddam." Does that mean that those who voted against the IWR didn't want to pressure Saddam?

[ThoughtCriminal]

3. No - it means they didn't trust Bush - nt

[indie_voter]

4. YES! We should all scream it loud and clear

WE.TOLD.YOU.SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!


The other day I received an email from somebody from an on-line moms' group I used to frequent. I had to leave because of the insanity during the run up to the war. She didn't mention the war but wanted to touch base, she was one of the biggest Bush cheerleaders (all the while proudly proclaiming she was well informed. NOT!). I deleted the message.

It is unforgiving of me I know, but I have so much rage toward these people for allowing themselves to be deluded when all the facts were in front of them. I need therapy.

[applegrove]

5. Speaking as one of those... yes. For some reason I believed

the Powell rational for war. Take that away - and it was a war of choice. And anyone who would choose war - likes it. And somehow wants it to be long and meandering rather than quick and needed. So that leaves many people out. If it wasn't even a pre-emptive war.. what does that leave.

Too late now. U.S. is stuck there. I'm betting Iran will be the next middle eastern country allowed to have the bomb. As long as they help push for peace in Iraq. They will have that sucker.

[patdem]

6. One thing stuck out when I read that article about GALLONS of BLOOD

sweet-talking you into giving up hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of gallons of blood just to make total asses of ourselves

So I did some figuring based on 5 quarts of blood per person:

2,902.5 gallons so far of American blood
260 gallons of coalition blood spilled
44,792.5 gallons of Iraqi blood spread out over Iraq (this is the 'Official' number and not the number put out by the Lancet which said over 100,000 have died.) (I averaged the 'Official' minimum deaths and the maximum deaths)

This is appalling, I have never thought of war in terms of the amount of blood spilled.

[dorkulon]

7. Ugh. That's some very effective imagery

kind of rattles the imagination. BTW, the Lancet study is a lot more accurate than the MSM would have you believe.