's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions

Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )

An extension of PDX's thread below....(5 posts)

An extension of PDX's thread below....eyebob
Nov 14, 2003 12:33 PM
since we all cannot agree on the relative merits (or lack thereof) of the neo-cons war, can we agree whether at some point "the war was worth it?" What would it take, how short would our occupation be, how much money would you say is palatible to spend, how many lives are "worth" it, etc? On the other side (it's only fair to pose the same questions to the libs), at what point would you say it's a success? We're all different for sure, but I'd surmise that just about all would agree that the Vietnam Conflict was a bad idea. What would it take for history to judge (30 years from now) that this undertaking (it's not officially a War) was a success or a failure?

Not necessarily an easy question, but I'd be interested in your take on this.
It's the people's war, fought by a coalition...No_sprint
Nov 14, 2003 12:38 PM
73% of the nation supported it as reported by CNN. Nearly 75 countries were part of the coalition in some way.

Yes, worth it.
Great pointLeonnard
Nov 14, 2003 2:23 PM
This means that the war was "worth it" in the beginning when more people supported it. Now that support is declining, it's NOT worth it.
Nov 14, 2003 1:27 PM
Is the liberation of a country from a depraved despot that we tolerated and/or propped up for decades even eligible to be called a success? That is a bit like asking at what point justice has been served for a man who has been wrongly imprisoned for 20 years. At minimum, we have a responsibility to get them back on their feet. But we are not entitled to allegiance or even gratitude (much less economic windfalls) in return.

If we learn the value of protecting international justice and human rights, even at the expense of our narrow economic and political interests, that would be success.
A popular, stable, non-belligerent government ...PdxMark
Nov 15, 2003 7:47 AM
in Iraq would be a starting point to decide whether it was worth it. Basically, achieving the goal that the Administration held out at the start of the war -- the neocon wet-dream result. (Eww, yucky mental image..) Once we have the result that's worthwhile, then we can factor in the costs (mainly ours) in terms of people, money, and whatever else, to decide if it was "worth it."

At this point, to me, it's a work in progress. To judge if it was "worth it" at this time the answer is no. But there's time for success to be achieved.

I think an ideal result could make it worthwhile if it happens quickly enough, even though the war was started under false and incorrect pretenses. Success of GWB's Big Adventure would make the world a better place, but it wouldn't erase the misleading, fuzzy, drifting, evolving rationalizations that attempted (and still attempt) to justify the war.