"Yes I believe the vast majority of Americans would want a war to justified and Iraq like Vietnam was not justified. People would not agree to send their sons and daughters to their death and to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on a war they did not believe justified."

Most people would want to live in Willy Wonka's factory, too, but it ain't gonna happen. That's not the way the world works.

Bakerstreet

War is not Willy Wonka's Factory - it is life and death. There is NO excuse to go to war unless there is no other option. The fact is that we did not have to go to war with Iraq. They had no capability of attacking this country and anyone that believes otherwise is in a dream world. They had no military capable of attacking anyone. They had no nuclear weapons and these facts were known in 2002. Congress gave Bush the authority to go to was as a LAST RESORT. That is the problem—WE HAD MANY OTHER RESORTS and when Bush went to war without exercising those other resorts is when he violated the authority he was given by Congress. There was no urgency that required us to attack Iraq in March 2003. It is time to impeach both Bush and Cheney. They have abused their power and refuse to enforce the laws of this country.

"War is not Willy Wonka's Factory - it is life and death. There is NO excuse to go to war unless there is no other option."

Yet, you can't name a war in American history where there wasn't another option. Not a single one. Period. You've gone from "direct threat", to "justified", to "no other option". Next you'll put on a little straw hat and start making rocking chairs.

Why do you do this, round and round, back to your argument? Say it, wait a tick, say it again. You might as well be arguing against lust or greed or pride. Sadly, you don't even have a Bible to back up your politics. It's the world according to the Col.

War is not Willy Wonka's Factory - it is life and death. There is NO excuse to go to war unless there is no other option.

Ok Colonel What other options did we as a nation have that would provide us with security? Keep in mind the facts that AQ was in Iraq, Saddam was providing safe haven for the terrorist that attacked us on 9/11 that this information was public knowledge. That our President said that there is no difference between the terrorist and those that harbor and support terrorist. We just finished attacking Afghanistan for the same reason. That Saddam publicly stated that he would sell or give his WMD to terrorist that want to attack America and or Israel. WMD Saddam said he had but we could not account for and signs that his stockpiles were being shipped out of the country to another country that supports terrorist. So said the Secretary of State to the UN. The Information provided by Germany, not the CIA, that Saddam had mobil labs producing more WMD. With those facts that are not disputed by any nation tell me what YOU as our fearless leader would do other than attack Iraq. Keep in mind that the longer you wait the greater chance that the WMD will be in the hands of terrorist and Intel reports from two nations say that Saddam was trying to rebuild his nuclear program again. So sit and wait until he has a dirty bomb to give to AQ or wait longer till he has a nuclear bomb, or attack now and eliminate the threat before it becomes a clear and present danger to the USA that you as our leader is sworn to protect and defend? What do you do Mr. President?

Bakerstreet

We had no option in the following wars:

Civil War
WWII
Korea

We may have had some options in WWI.

If we start attacking all countries that have a potential of causing our country harm, we will be at war all over the world. In March 2003 we were in far greater danger from North Korea and Iran then Iraq. Just consider a country like Pakistan with a government like Iran. They have Islamic radicals, long range missiles and nuclear weapons.

I spent 30 Years in the Army and attended just about all the schools that taught the doctrine that has proven effective in the past. The way Bush ran the Iraq war VIOLATED just about every policy and doctrine that has been developed over the years. I did not agree with invading Iraq because they were not a danger to the U.S. and it diverted our resources from Afghanistan. Time has shown I was correct. However after Bush made the bad choice to invade Iraq he compounded that error by not sending the troop levels required to maintain stability after Saddam fell. There is a lot of Hype about this so called new policy of Clear, Hold and Build. That is not NEW. The problem that not sending the troops that were need was that we could CLEAR but we DID NOT HOLD due to the limited manpower. That allowed the very same elements to return and reestablish their terrorist operations. Then we would go in again clear and leave. Then the terrorists again reestablished operations. We could not prevent the use of Ammo and explosives that were stored in over 200 locations thought out Iraq. WHY-- We did not have enough manpower. We could not prevent foreign terrorists from crossing into Iraq because we did not have the manpower needed. We could not protect the pipe lines, water and electrical grid from terrorist attacks because we did not have the manpower. The invasion Plan called for 500,000 troops at the time Saddam fell. We had at best 150,000.

In the future the Iraq War will be studied and show both strategic and tactical failure on a scale we have not scene before. This is what happens when we have a Commander-in-chief who lacks both Foreign Policy experience and fails to allow those trained to fight wars to do their job!

we actually didn't have much of an option going into vietnam either. we were obligated under the SEATO pact to respond when asked. and i do believe we were asked to come in and help.

that's not to start a debate on the rest of that war, just our original entry into it.

I spent 30 Years in the Army and attended just about all the schools that taught the doctrine that has proven effective in the past.

What was your MOS?

Paladin77

1193 (Field Artillery), Nuclear weapons (M1 Prefix) and later Finance Officer. I completed the Artillery Officers Basic, Combat Intelligence, Nuclear Weapons, Command and General Staff College and Army War College. I also completed Finance Officers Basic and Advanced.

Col...don't ya just love the nitpicking and having to prove EVERYTHING to these neoconservatives including your very existence sometimes?

it's a huge laugh when their "arguments" are reduced to this kind of browbeating and acting AS IF every i isn't dotted and t crossed and we don't show them everything to the "nth" degree, then we must be lying,,,what a joke they have become!

They can NOT address the real issues and like Bush will never admit when they are wrong!

Col...don't ya just love the nitpicking and having to prove EVERYTHING to these neoconservatives including your very existence sometimes?

Yeah, who needs proof.  Make outrageous accusations without backing them up, but thats the usual for the liberals and liberal-tarians now.

They can NOT address the real issues and like Bush will never admit when they are wrong!

We address all your issues col, and prove most of them wrong.  The fact that you cannot accept anything but "blame Bush" is not our problem.

Col...don't ya just love the nitpicking and having to prove EVERYTHING to these neoconservatives including your very existence sometimes?

Paladin's question was NOT nitpicking! The col talks about this and that as if he's an authority on the subject no matter what it is. Paladin was merely trying to establish a baseline on the col's education. Since you're still kind of new to this posting thing, why don't you "listen" instead of running your mouth?

IslandDog

You have done NOTHING of the sort. The data I present comes from either governmental agencies or research groups that have national standing. Your problem is that when they clearly show how lame Bush and his policies are, you attempt to divert attention from the consequences of the Bush policies by attacking me or the sources of the data. The thing that makes you and some others on this Blog site look truly stupid is that you are contradicting agencies like the U.S. Treasury, Census Bureau, Brookings Institute , The Comptroller General of the U.S., CBO, CIA, GAO etc. It is you that do not know what you are talking about not the unimpeachable sources I sight in my Blogs.

This is a list of the major sources I used in my book:

George W. Bush – Robin Hood for the Rich by Colonel Gene P. Abel


Sources:

Against All Enemies by Richard A. Clarke

Alan Greenspan, Chairmen Federal Reserve

Bill Gates

Boston Globe-Bush National Guard Service

Brookings Institute

Center For Economic And Policy Research

Charles Lewis

Congressional Budget Office - CBO

Dan Rather

David M. Walker Comptroller General of the United States

Dept. of Labor, Division of Labor Force Statistics

Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Public Debt

Face The Nation Interview with VP Cheney 2001

Federal Reserve

General Accounting Office –GAO

General Barry McCaffrey

General Eric Shinseki, Former Army CoS

General Wesley Clark

Hoover Institute

Imperial Hubris by Anonymous (Michael Scheuer)

Journal of Foreign Affairs

Lt. General John Riggs

Lt. George W. Bush’s National Guard records

Office of Management and Budget – OMB

Paul Craig Roberts

Paul O’Neil, Former Secretary of the Treasury 2001-2003

Paul R. Pillar retired CIA Top Counterterrorism Coordinator

Plan of Attack by Bob Woodward

Popular Science -- Airborne Laser

Presidential Commission on Social Security

Professor Jeffrey Record -- United States Army War College visiting professor

Professor Paul Krugman, Princeton University

Professor Rogan Kersh

Senator Ted Kennedy comments on Medicare January 2005

Sierra Club

Social Security and Medicare Trustees

The Price of Loyalty by Ron Suskind

Toshi Tsurumi, Harvard Professor of GWB

United States Army War College

U S Conference of Mayors

Warren Buffet

Washington Post

60 minutes

60 Minutes II

Since you're still kind of new to this posting thing, why don't you "listen" instead of running your mouth?

dude,,,i've been on here for 3 years...i've been writing online since the early 90's...reach in your pocket, pull out a quarter and buy a clue...

Paladin's question was NOT nitpicking!

i've seen this man's credentials repeadedly questioned over time. if ya'll were paying attention, you'd know he is who he says he is.

hell, dufus, you even accused me and him of being the same person with absolutely NOTHING substantial to back it up with...just a typical knee-jerk reaction when you thought ya "smelled blood" and could "get em" ...so you went shooting off your mouth, again like dick cheney on a quail hunt...

and the only reason i even know of his existence is from your (and your cronies) blabbering about him all over this site. but like other things you seem clueless on, you probably never realized that only "no publicity is bad publicity."

keep diggin miler...china's just a few more feet down...

LMFAO!!!!