How can liberals say we've made zero progress in Iraq? Do they ignore the facts or what?

Question

1) We defeated Saddam, like we said we would if he didn't comply with the UN resolution for weopons inspections.

2) The Iraqi people drafted and ratified a constitution, creating their own government.

3) The Iraqi people held elections and formed a government. Remember then holding up the ink spots on their thumbs indicating they had voted?

4) We're killing Al Qaeda, and Al Qaeda has not attacked american soil since 2001.

5) The Iraqi government is distributing oil revenue to all the "tribes" in Iraq.

So congress is going to set benchmarks? Let them set their own benchmarks.

None of the answers so far have addressed ANY of the accomplishments I've listed.

We've already had Victory, we defeated Saddam. Now we're dealing with nation building, where we either have success or we don't.

What are the liberals doing to insure success? NOTHING. All they're doing is saying success is impossible. For liberals, I'M SURE IT IS.

Dana, you're wrong.

Al Qaeda DID attack us, in 1993, when they bombed the world trade center.

Yes, I think its GOOD that Al Qaeda is in Iraq now. We have soldiers there that can kill them. So yes, it's a great improvement.

Nemisis,

You're wrong. Iraq exported 341,000 barrels of crude oil a day to the U.S. market in May (2007).

Here's the link, just in case you actually want to know something instead of spewing ignorance:

http://www.iraqupdates.com/p_articles.php/article/19912

Answer 1

Whats good for America is bad for liberals. That's why they say what they do.

Answer 2

We didn't need to defeat Saddam, and for a Con why do you give a rat's patootie what the UN says you guys want nothing to do with them, war was actually a poor strategy sine we could have kept him contained and toothless with virtually no lose of life and a helluva a lot MONEY, lame argument of your #1

The "Constitution as you call it doesn't function that's why there's civil strife they basically put everything off, When South Africa came out of Apartheid they took two years to draft a TRUELY all inclusive constu=itution and WOW it worked the one you cite is worthless Lame Argument #2 down the toilet

They may have vopted but after the candidates with GENUINE potential to lead were out of the picture we have local school boards that function better they can't Govern so there goes lame argument# 3
Al Qeada in Iraq didn't exist before we got so we exterminate a beast we created but like roachs can keep coming because ur being helps them recruit at this pace it won't end, We didn't have an attack from 1993 to 2001 so time line wise so far Clinton is ahead Lame argument #4 toast

The Iraqi Government IS NOT distrubuting oil wealth you're behind the times the deal fell apart because the Kurds had signed a deal with an American Oil Company (who lo an behold have ties to the Bush admiistration) and the Shia and Sunni called it off Lame argument #5 put to rest


So maybe you just don't know what the hell you're talking about and should shut the F up

Answer 3

I'm a 'liberal', for the purpose of this question at least, and I'm well aware that we have made progress in Iraq. And it's even possible that the progress that we have made thus fair might be indicative of more progress to come, if...

The entire operation wasn't marked by such high levels of corruption. Billions of tax-payer dollars gone missing, Haliburton doing things the Army could've done but at many times the cost, terrible leadership strategies that make it so clear this is not a war in the defence of freedom or liberty or even just the American people, but just so a few people can make a lot of money.

As for Al Qaeda not attacking the United States, they've certainly attempted to (several foiled plots, as shown on many major news networks) and have successfully carried out attacks on its allies and on embassies around the world.

I don't know what liberals you're talking about, and i think that you're limiting yourself by thinking of anyone who weighs in on this debate as either 'liberal' or 'conservative'. But I get your point, by liberal (in this case) you mean people who are anti-war. Some may ignore facts, but then you've also ignored some facts. Or not listed all of the ones you're aware of. Soldiers in Iraq are, on average, in an explosion at least once a month. There are extensive areas of Iraq which do not have electricity or water or access to medical care. IEDs and other explosives are being set off in Iraq almost every day. Truth be told, both sides are making progress.

What I like about this administration is the active stance that's being taken with regards to the war on terror and foreign policy. Regardlesss of what ever other criticisms someone might make; our government is doing things. Good or for bad, the war in Iraq will have some effect. Now whether this government is doing things with an agenda to win the war on terror, or just win elections and make a hell of a lot of money while they can is... not part of your question.

The point is, this liberal is not ignoring any facts. But you're getting at the fact that some might be; conservatives are also ignoring facts. A lot of them. You might be, or you might just not have mentioned some. Also, I haven't heard any liberals say we've made zero progress. But I can say that many think that we're in a huge mess over there. One that politicians are not doing anything to try and clean up. I think that we'd make ten times the progress made so far with an honest politician that supports the war in iraq, rather than a corrupt one that pretends to support sending money to Iraq; and Haliburton.

Answer 4

1) We defeated Saddam several years ago, and disbanded his army. We should have left then, when the mission was accomplished, but we didn't.

2) The Iraqi people drafted and ratified a constitution to form a coalition government that doesn't exist any more, since several key factions have abandoned it.

3) What separates numbers 2 and 3 in your mind? It turns out that voting isn't the only thing necessary to maintain a government.

4) Don't confuse the groups "Al Qaeda in Iraq" with "Al Qaeda"- they're separate entities, working independantly. Osama Bin Laden hasn't set foot in Iraq. Do you know where he actually is? No, that isn't rhetorical, I want to know where he is- the President stopped looking for him 5 years ago.

5) The Iraqi government ISN'T distributing the oil revenue to all the factions in Iraq- that's why they're still having a civil war. And anyway, they're supposed to be distributing that revenue to the United States, because that's how this war was SUPPOSED to be paid for.

Congress already set benchmarks- the President failed at 15 of 18 of them.

Answer 5

I envy you; I wish I could also live in never never land.

!. Yes, the army defeated Hussein’s army, but he complied with the resolutions. The US just decided than since we could not find any WMD's with inspections we would just invade. Bush was sure he had them. No matter that all intelligence indicated otherwise and that after we invaded nothing has been found.

2 and 3. Pipe dream #1. This is a puppet government. You can't educate people about democracy in just a few months. We have had it in America for years, and it is still a work in progress. Most people in Iraq had not real choice on who to vote for, everything was dictated by the US.

4. AL Qaeda was not in Iraq before we invaded, they are there now because we created the perfect situation for them to flourish and prosper. And believe me, there will be another attack in America sooner or later.

5. Oil revenue, what oil revenue? Is that the reason we are spending billions over there weekly? Wake up Peter Pan. If we continue this war, is gong to break the us sooner or later.

There has never been any question about military progress, the US has the most powerful military in the world, is the political progress that is not being made, and there is zero progress on that. Wake up.

I am a republican

Answer 6

1) Saddam Hussein did comply. The Bush administration chased the U.N. away and announced they would start bombing when it became clear they wouldn't find anything.

2 & 3) The election was a sham and the government is a puppet government. The ink spots was a photo-op. The constitution, it follows, is also a sham, because the government that drafted it has no legitimity.

4) Al Qaeda wasn't a problem in Iraq until the U.S. got there and b) People defending their land as per the Geneva Convention are not terrorists. They have the legitimate right to take such action under international law.

5) You have got to be joking.

Answer 7

1) It was not the USA's decision to make whether or not to attack Iraq. Weapons inspectors wanted more time and guess what? They were right.

2) Their government is failing to meet virtually every benchmark we set.

3) Their government will likely not last after we leave, and we're not staying in Iraq forever.

4) Al Qaeda had not attacked American soil before 2001, either. Your logic is flawed. Al Qaeda wasn't even in Iraq prior to the war, and now they are. You think that's an improvement?

5) Except for the oil revenue that we take.

Congress has been setting benchmarks. The Iraqi government has been failing to meet them, and taking vacations almost as long as Bush's in the meantime.

Answer 8

1. We did defeat Saddam, YAY!
2. The Iraqi constitution is a joke. Guns rule. Bombs rule.
3. The government their is a joke. If they had a real government we could leave and their would be no controversy.
4. We are killing Al-Qaeda. And for every 1 we kill 3 innocents die. And that is conservative number.
5. The Bush Government is distributing Oil revenues to all their friends and giving the leftovers to the Iraqi government.


Bush's war is a joke. I say Bushes war because Saddam has no link to 9/11. Things are no better now then before. Saddam killed people and now Bush is killing people. That is no progress.

Answer 9

I think about question would be why did we invade Iraq? We were told because of 9/11 this needed to be done. Osama Bin laden sends 19 hijackers to the USA to bomb US land with planes and kill US citizens. The US invades Iraq. It is common knowledge that Osama Bin Laden was responsible for this attack. Yet to this day Osama has not been shot at , had a bomb shot out him or even a rock thrown at him. Too bad your 5 points above do not cover any of this. I don't know how old you are or how knowledgeable you are but the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. They blew up a lot of military property and personnel. Guess what the next step was. The US attacked Japan. Not China. Nor did we pick a country that we had problems with and attack them. We attacked the country responsible for bombing the US. Next point aren't you a little concerned that common thieves sneak through our borders every day. yet the president is in support of giving these same people guest worker passes. For someone trying to deal with terrorism he sure doesn't walk the walk. here's another question for you. Why exactly did we invade Iraq? To spread Democracy? Maybe another president would have gone after the right man and the right country.

Answer 10

1. You invaded a country, removed it's leader and left a power vacuum that has resulted in an internal war that you are struggling to control.
2. The Iraqi people (or some of them) elected a government that is effectively powerless. They have traditionally been a feudal system and this will continue.
3. Al Qaida was not in Iraq until it was invaded. The invasion craeated a climate in which terrorism flourished
4. What oil revenue? Iraq is still not exporting oil

How can a powerless, puppet government set benchmarks. Immediately the allied forces withdraw, the country will revert to it's feudal state in which the most powerful will assume control. The country will take decades to recover from this outside interference

Answer 11

1. Saddam may be gone, but they can always get someone worse.

2. If Iraq is such a success why does Bush have to make surprise visits.

3. We are killing Al-Quaeda, but they are also killing us. Also for every one person we kill there are 3 more ready to greet us as liberators. Also why attack Americans on our soil while they are having a lot of success in their own backyard.

4. I also agree with another poster. If Iraq is such a success start planning your vaction. Drop us a post card.

The Iraq war is a big joke that does not have a good punch line.