Harris vs. Cheney: Who ya got?

#26
#26
GroverCleveland said:
Agree, agree, agree.

I always, however, was afraid it would turn into what it did and thought we should have rolled through, announce do not do this again or we'll be back better than ever and left. Would have be in a much better world position today I believe.
Click to expand...
In Iraq? There was zero reason to go there except for the lies created and pushed by Cheney
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol and Rasputin_Vol
#27
#27
Sea Ray said:
Cheney was definitely effective but unfortunately he was effective at enacting very bad policy. He played a major role is our getting involved in the Iraq and Afghanistan. This was based on a lie (WMDs) and it had enormous negative consequences for our country. It blew up our budget and we'll likely never see a balanced budget again. We were a united country prior and now we're hopelessly divided. We have our boys coming back wounded and maimed.

I'm a Republican but Bush/Cheney did more damage than Obama/Biden. We need to admit that

As for Kamala, I'm glad she's not more effective. That's a good thing
Click to expand...
I am sure Bin Laden is in total torment right now; but if he knew just how he had contributed to our nation‘s struggles the last 20 years; he wouldn’t be totally displeased. We ultimately took the bait and got played exactly as he had hoped we would. We fell for the trap and Cheney and Rumsfeld were the first mice leading us all toward the cheese
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sea Ray and hog88
#28
#28
OrangeTsar said:
Cheney was very effective. But he pushed a policy with regards Iraq that got us involved in a war in which we had no place and entangled is in the region for literally decades. Full disclaimer: at the time I thought it was the right move. Hindsight has proven me wrong. America can’t be the world’s policeman. The temptation to intervene just because you CAN intervene is strong and the American people justifiably can’t stand to see injustice in other countries. But sometimes you just have to step back and take a breath.
Now Balloon Head Biden and even our own „conservatives“ in Congress are working overtime to try and get us deeper and deeper into the Ukraine conflict. Once again an absolute moral travesty but one in which the long term repressions of our involvement are perilous beyond imagination.
Click to expand...
Let's not forget that just about all politicians were onboard with going in, the left likes to revise history but at the time they were all in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#30
#30
GroverCleveland said:
Agree, agree, agree.

I always, however, was afraid it would turn into what it did and thought we should have rolled through, announce do not do this again or we'll be back better than ever and left. Would have be in a much better world position today I believe.
Click to expand...
The danger in removing a thuggish strong man is always that you will unleash the chaos that he had to be a strongman in order to prevent. Anyone with a knowledge of the area couldnhave told him (and probably did) that Iraq was a soda that had been shaken thoroughly and that we better think carefully before removing the lid (Saddam).
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol and OrangeBoro
#33
#33
OrangeBoro said:
I agree, I was too. I certainly see things different now.
Click to expand...

My opinion at the time was one of trust. My thinking was "well, they know more about this than I do. If they feel it's necessary then I support it."

I've now learned my lesson. Never trust gov't to that extent again
 
  • Like
Reactions: OrangeBoro
#34
#34
utvolpj said:
In Iraq? There was zero reason to go there except for the lies created and pushed by Cheney
Click to expand...
Have heard this narrative over and over again by Monday morning QBs. They went because they thought, wrongly, that Iraq had WMDs. There were bad decisions all around from Saddam and his minions to intelligence agencies here and around the world. Based on everything I've read, I do not second guess the decision to go. But I absolutely, unequivocally think the decision to stay was horrible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OrangeBoro
#35
#35
hog88 said:
Yes but there is no money to be made in doing it that way.
Click to expand...
Yep. A lot of people in Washington, DC and in defense industries made a lot of money. For that matter, people in a lot of areas that had nothing to do with defense, making war or the Middle East made a lot of money appending spending to war authorizations. Both parties...made a lot of money. It pisses me off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#36
#36
Sea Ray said:
My opinion at the time was one of trust. My thinking was "well, they know more about this than I do. If they feel it's necessary then I support it."

I've now learned my lesson. Never trust gov't to that extent again
Click to expand...
Yes and I was also thinking a guy like that needs to be taken out. And while he was a terrible violent thug, it's not my problem. Iraq/Afghanistan has shaped my opinion on things like Ukraine, not my problem don't send $$ we don't have to other corrupt leaders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland and McDad
#37
#37
OrangeTsar said:
I am sure Bin Laden is in total torment right now; but if he knew just how he had contributed to our nation‘s struggles the last 20 years; he wouldn’t be totally displeased. We ultimately took the bait and got played exactly as he had hoped we would. We fell for the trap and Cheney and Rumsfeld were the first mice leading us all toward the cheese
Click to expand...
Edited. Misread Bin Laden and was thinking Saddam. Saddam was an idiot.
 
#38
#38
OrangeTsar said:
The danger in removing a thuggish strong man is always that you will unleash the chaos that he had to be a strongman in order to prevent. Anyone with a knowledge of the area couldnhave told him (and probably did) that Iraq was a soda that had been shaken thoroughly and that we better think carefully before removing the lid (Saddam).
Click to expand...
The old saw about better the devil you know than the one you don't. Sometimes one is right about that and sometimes not. Again, he was playing cards he didn't have with the threats to use WMDs he didn't have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OrangeTsar
#39
#39
GroverCleveland said:
Have heard this narrative over and over again by Monday morning QBs. They went because they thought, wrongly, that Iraq had WMDs. There were bad decisions all around from Saddam and his minions to intelligence agencies here and around the world. Based on everything I've read, I do not second guess the decision to go. But I absolutely, unequivocally think the decision to stay was horrible.
Click to expand...
No they falsified the evidence and pushed it through (using Powell). Cheney was effective in leading that effort and getting the US stuck in a hole for 2 decades based on lies. He made lots of money of it though

There was zero reason to go into Iraq.
 
#40
#40
OrangeBoro said:
Yes and I was also thinking a guy like that needs to be taken out. And while he was a terrible violent thug, it's not my problem. Iraq/Afghanistan has shaped my opinion on things like Ukraine, not my problem don't send $$ we don't have to other corrupt leaders.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'd really like to know how small a percentage of the money appropriated for the Ukraine actually goes to the Ukraine. I've felt all along this is a European problem and they need to deal with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88 and OrangeBoro
#41
#41
GroverCleveland said:
The old saw about better the devil you know than the one you don't. Sometimes one is right about that and sometimes not. Again, he was playing cards he didn't have with the threats to use WMDs he didn't have.
Click to expand...
I think Uncle Sam has an abysmal track record with taking out "bad" leaders, supporting "good" leaders, and propping up candidates vying for the job of leader
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88 and GroverCleveland
#42
#42
utvolpj said:
No they falsified the evidence and pushed it through (using Powell). Cheney was effective in leading that effort and getting the US stuck in a hole for 2 decades based on lies. He made lots of money of it though

There was zero reason to go into Iraq.
Click to expand...
We will just have to agree to disagree. I've read nothing credible to support this contention. It's like listening to Adam Schiff with his stupid Russia claims.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OrangeBoro
#44
#44
McDad said:
I think Uncle Sam has an abysmal track record with taking out "bad" leaders, supporting "good" leaders, and propping up candidates vying for the job of leader
Click to expand...
Because our foreign policy lacks the ability to look past a few years in the future. Seems there's never a "what if" discussion
 
#45
#45
GroverCleveland said:
The old saw about better the devil you know than the one you don't. Sometimes one is right about that and sometimes not. Again, he was playing cards he didn't have with the threats to use WMDs he didn't have.
Click to expand...
A nation ruled by a military strong man is almost certain to fate even worse without him IF that nation consists of non homogeneous antagonist people groups. Iraq was a nation artificially cobbled together by the British after WWI from three groups tha despised each other in a diplomatic „shotgun wedding“. Similar situation with Yugoslavia under the communists and Tito. In both cases, the underlying animosities Just simmered until the lid was removed and the hatred boiled over. Germany after Hitler and Japan after Tojo were different in that both Countries were homogeneous people groups with a long national history and capavale of stable self government
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#46
#46
GroverCleveland said:
We will just have to agree to disagree. I've read nothing credible to support this contention. It's like listening to Adam Schiff with his stupid Russia claims.
Click to expand...
Then it seems you've read very little past 2003. Then evidence wasn't bad, it was fake. Cheney knew it and pushed ahead anyways

Saying you didn't know that at the time is one thing. Saying it now with everything that's been released is confusing
 
#47
#47
utvolpj said:
Because our foreign policy lacks the ability to look past a few years in the future. Seems there's never a "what if" discussion
Click to expand...
Oh, there is plenty of "what if" discussions. Those scenarios just tend to support leanings whoever is espousing them.
 
#48
#48
GroverCleveland said:
Have heard this narrative over and over again by Monday morning QBs. They went because they thought, wrongly, that Iraq had WMDs. There were bad decisions all around from Saddam and his minions to intelligence agencies here and around the world. Based on everything I've read, I do not second guess the decision to go. But I absolutely, unequivocally think the decision to stay was horrible.
Click to expand...

They did have WMDs, that's what Assad used on his people. BUT that still doesn't justify the invasion.
 
#49
#49
utvolpj said:
Because our foreign policy lacks the ability to look past a few years in the future. Seems there's never a "what if" discussion
Click to expand...
We're also wildly inconsistent. This country commits genocide and we roll out the heavy hand. That country commits genocide and we look the other way.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top