GWB created ISIS?

[Sparko]

Let's see.... Saddam invaded Kuwait, imprisoned his own people and tortured them, committed genocide against the kurds with chemical weapons...

I guess you are right, he was quite a nice fellow. What was I thinking.

[Paprika]

Let's see.... Saddam invaded Kuwait, imprisoned his own people and tortured them, committed genocide against the kurds with chemical weapons...

I guess you are right, he was quite a nice fellow. What was I thinking.

[Bill the Cat]

Observe: originally the rationale was that Saddam was amassing WMDs.

To which both sides agreed. And to which the Wikileaks documents support.

After the illegal invasion

Source: letter to members of the Council on Foreign Relations/American Society of International Law Roundtable

"The United States has clear authority under international law to use force against Iraq under present circumstances...

The legal authority to use force to address Iraq's material breaches is clear. Nothing in UNSCR 1441 requires a further resolution, or other form of Security Council approval, to authorize the use of force. A 'material breach' of the cease-fire conditions is the predicate for use of force against Iraq. And there can be no doubt that Iraq is in 'material breach' of its obligations, as the Council reaffirmed in UNSCR 1441."

Apr. 10, 2003 - John B. Bellinger, III

© Copyright Original Source

So, no it was not illegal. Iraq continued to fire on our planes in the no-fly zone. Therefore, force was approved.

this was found to be false so all the post hoc excuse "democracy!!!", "Saddam was a dirtbag" etc etc.

And the mass graves that continue to be discovered are clear evidence that he was a dirtbag.

Nothing had to be done, but a need is manufactured to avoid all responsibility whatsoever.

True. Nothing HAD to be done about the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbor either. Nothing ever HAS to be done about anything.

Isis isn't in power over all of Iraq, and already things are much worse.

Not even remotely close. The Kurds in the North alone lost over 50,000 to Saddam's Anfal campaign, including over 5,000 massacred in the chemical warfare attack at Halabja alone.

The analogy does not hold up, not least because the US is not the global police.

Combined with the rest of the UN's national forces, yes we are.

[Paprika]

To which both sides agreed. And to which the Wikileaks documents support.

Saddam amassing WMDs was a lie; Bush knew it was a lie but pressed on anyway.

So, no it was not illegal. Iraq continued to fire on our planes in the no-fly zone. Therefore, force was approved.

The establishment of the no-fly zones was illegal.

And the mass graves that continue to be discovered are clear evidence that he was a dirtbag.

Your point being?

True.

So don't claim necessity and use that as justification.

Not even remotely close. The Kurds in the North alone lost over 50,000 to Saddam's Anfal campaign, including over 5,000 massacred in the chemical warfare attack at Halabja alone.

Fair enough. I will modify my claim to the extent that if ISIS had the weaponry and US-supplied chemical weapons, it will do worse. Let us not forget how the US didn't care that Saddam was using these chemical weapons against Iran or the Kurds, in fact offering them much support.

Combined with the rest of the UN's national forces, yes we are.

Not at all; you're not an appointed group under the law to enforce the law. A more accurate analogy would be self-appointed vigilantes.

[Darth Ovious]

Well our Prime Minister Tony Blair pretty much admitted there was no WMD's and that a mistake was made. He just said afterwards that at least we got rid of a bad guy. However bad guys exist all over the world. If you want to get rid of bad guys the Mugabe might be an option or any other of the tons of dictators out there. Personally I think it's all about the oil. I just wish they were at least honest about it.

[Yttrium]

Saddam amassing WMDs was a lie; Bush knew it was a lie but pressed on anyway.

I strongly disagree with that. I was in the Air Force at the time. I saw a lot of the intelligence information. It all pointed to Saddam having chemical weapons, as shown by Colin Powell's briefing to the U.N. The problem was that Saddam was insanely paranoid. He buried trucks in the desert for no good reason. He put fertilizers in a guarded bunker. He inadvertently did everything to make it look like he had WMDs, even though he didn't.

Mind you, I was against the idea of invading Iraq. We presented the case to the U.N., the U.N. did their inspections, and they decided not to attack. That should have been the end of it, as far as I was concerned. We were still sitting on Iraq's border and had Saddam well contained. I do think Bush misrepresented the real reason he wanted to invade Iraq. He wanted to replace the government of Iraq with a stable democracy, which might influence other countries in the region to become democracies as well. The WMD approach was just a public excuse to invade. But he didn't lie about the WMDs, he just came to the wrong conclusion, along with the intelligence community.

[Paprika]

I strongly disagree with that. I was in the Air Force at the time. I saw a lot of the intelligence information. It all pointed to Saddam having chemical weapons, as shown by Colin Powell's briefing to the U.N.

I'll look into that further. Chemical weapons aside, there were lies about biological and nuclear weapons.

Mind you, I was against the idea of invading Iraq. We presented the case to the U.N., the U.N. did their inspections, and they decided not to attack. That should have been the end of it, as far as I was concerned. We were still sitting on Iraq's border and had Saddam well contained. I do think Bush misrepresented the real reason he wanted to invade Iraq. He wanted to replace the government of Iraq with a stable democracy, which might influence other countries in the region to become democracies as well. The WMD approach was just a public excuse to invade.

An illegal invasion. And after the country's inevitable pullout, ISIS arose.

[Yttrium]

I'll look into that further. Chemical weapons aside, there were lies about biological and nuclear weapons.

I think some of the buried trucks might have been part of the mistaken intel about biological weapons, but my memory is vague on that. You'd have to be more specific on the biological and nuclear "lies".

[Paprika]

Well our Prime Minister Tony Blair pretty much admitted there was no WMD's and that a mistake was made.

He's admitted that the casus belli was false, but as far as I can tell he still refuses to consider the invasion a mistake.

If you want to get rid of bad guys the Mugabe might be an option or any other of the tons of dictators out there.

Right. The lack of any consistency (Saudi Arabia, anyone?) reveals that 'global police rightfully taking out dirtbags' justification is mere pretext.

[Paprika]

I think some of the buried trucks might have been part of the mistaken intel about biological weapons, but my memory is vague on that. You'd have to be more specific on the biological and nuclear "lies".

It's late, so I'll leave you with this:

An example of that: According to the newly declassified NIE, the intelligence community concluded that Iraq "probably has renovated a [vaccine] production plant" to manufacture biological weapons "but we are unable to determine whether [biological weapons] agent research has resumed." The NIE also said Hussein did not have "sufficient material" to manufacture any nuclear weapons and "the information we have on Iraqi nuclear personnel does not appear consistent with a coherent effort to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program."

But in an October 7, 2002 speech in Cincinnati, Ohio, then-President George W. Bush simply said Iraq, "possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons" and "the evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program."

[Spartacus]

I strongly disagree with that. I was in the Air Force at the time. I saw a lot of the intelligence information. It all pointed to Saddam having chemical weapons, as shown by Colin Powell's briefing to the U.N. The problem was that Saddam was insanely paranoid. He buried trucks in the desert for no good reason. He put fertilizers in a guarded bunker. He inadvertently did everything to make it look like he had WMDs, even though he didn't.

I have heard differing interpretations of this, and I'm personally inclined to believe the explanation that he wanted the world to believe he was working on nuclear weapons, even if he wasn't, because he thought 1. it would deter Iran and 2. the West wouldn't actually invade.

[Tassman]

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/05...-bush-isis.cnn

And they act like they are so intelligent, and she can't even pronounce pedantic. It's not pendantic, you clod...

Yeah, right! Of course the great "Dubya" was known for his flawless English and graceful eloquence.

[Bill the Cat]

I was in the Air Force at the time. .

As was I. Isn't it kind of amusing that a clod from Singapore is telling 2 US military veterans that we don't know what we are talking about...

[Bill the Cat]

Yeah, right! Of course the great "Dubya" was known for his flawless English and graceful eloquence.

Nice tu quoque

[Paprika]

As was I. Isn't it kind of amusing that a clod from Singapore is telling 2 US military veterans that we don't know what we are talking about...

Nice genetic fallacy.