WW I and WW II, The First Gulf War and Korea were very different from Iraq. They were clear and present dangers. The American Revolution and our Civil War were to establish and maintain our country. The Revolutionary War was to liberate us from King George III? Who fought our Civil War? We can not police the human rights and depose dictators that abuse their people. We can not fight other countries Civil Wars the way we are in Iraq!

We have enough to deal with the needs of this country which we ignore i.e. rebuilding the Gulf after Katrina or rebuilding the ageing infrastructure in our country! Just think of the $500 Billion we wasted in Iraq. That could have completely rebuilt EVERY home and business in the Gulf Area and we would have had change left! Add the future cost from Iraq and we could have paid to protect our ports and borders.

The Bush legacy will be one of an arrogant and ineffective leader. A man that made everything he touched worse for our country. The Next several presidents and congresses will be stuck fixing the things GWB destroyed!!!!! The cost to the American Taxpayer will be enormous and will take decades to fix!

Oh the drama.

WW I and WW II, The First Gulf War and Korea were very different from Iraq. They were clear and present dangers. The American Revolution and our Civil War were to establish and maintain our country. The Revolutionary War was to liberate us from King George III? Who fought our Civil War? We can not police the human rights and depose dictators that abuse their people. We can not fight other countries Civil Wars the way we are in Iraq!

So then you're saying that Germany was a threat to the US in WW1&2? Baloney! And the same with our Revolutionary War. There was NO threat to us! According to your doctrine the Rev War should have "never" been fought. I also noted that you completely skipped over the Spanish American war & the War of 1812. Was there a danger to the US at that time? NO! Just a bunch of greedy Americans who wanted more land for the first one. And NO danger to US on the 1812 one.

drmiler

Only a FOOL would equate Iraq with WWI, WWII The American Revolution, Korea or the Our Civil War. Dream on you FOOL!

"Only a FOOL would equate Iraq with WWI, WWII The American Revolution, Korea or the Our Civil War. Dream on you FOOL!"/

You are asserting that it is morally wrong to go to war unless there is a direct threat, col. Then, when faced with the fact that we have gone to lots of wars without being directly threatened, you say there's no comparison and call names.

You're the one making the assertion that we needed to fit some sort of criteria, then you ignore the fact that your imposed criteria has never really been required.

Bakerstreet

In WWII Japan attacked us and Germany was allied with Japan and was in the process of destroying Europe. There was NO such thing in the Iraq war. Hell Saddam could only conduct operations in the central portion of Iraq and was not a threat to any other country after the first Gulf War. We attacked a lame dog and are now in the middle of a Civil War that we can not win!

We accomplished the removal of Saddam and the defeat of him military. That was the objective. Nation Building is not a mission our military is equipped or trained to accomplish!

No I conceded the second world war. How many others? Spanish American War? Nope, was completely fabricated. WWI? Nope, they sank a boat, but we lose boats, airliners, etc., all the time and don't consider it a direct threat to America.

Korea? Vietnam? Grenada? Panama? The first Gulf War? Where do you get the idea that Bush is unique in making war without direct threat?

Saddam Hussein fired regularly on our aircraft. That, in and of itself, is more provocation that we had in some other wars.

We attacked a lame dog and are now in the middle of a Civil War that we can not win!

This shows the defeatist attitude that prevails among the left.  They have already convinced themselves that we have lost, and seem perfectly fine with it.

Korea? Vietnam? Grenada? Panama? The first Gulf War? Where do you get the idea that Bush is unique in making war without direct threat?

He already stated the first Gulf War was a "clear and present" danger to the U.S.  Still waiting for that explanation.

"He already stated the first Gulf War was a "clear and present" danger to the U.S. Still waiting for that explanation."

So, before he had made any threats, and before he'd fired on our aircraft, and before he'd tried to arrange the assassination of one of our presidents, THEN he was a danger.

After firing on our aircraft, attempting an assassination, made numerous threats, funded Palestinian terrorism, smuggled in updated arms technology, etc., no, then he was certainly no threat.

Frankly, he wasn't much of a threat before or after. Then again, he didn't NEED to be according to the way US wars have gone for 100 years. Only the Col knows where this rulebook he is quoting from is...

Bakerstreet

All the wars that you listed except for the Spanish American war, which is a lot like Iraq, were taking place before we became involved and the posed a very real threat to our country. The Iraq war was a preemptive war of choice against a country that had no capability to attack the United States. The result was to unleash sectarian violence that has existed among the factions sine some time in the 600's AD. By deposing Saddam and not replacing the control aspect to prevent those factions from organizing, we uncorked the bottle and allowed these factions to conduct the daily violence on each other that was prevented in the past by FORCE. In modern times that was the British and then Saddam. We have in essence set the stage where a Civil war has started and without overwhelming force that unrest will not be stopped from continuing the attacks on each other. The Sunni and Shiite are fighting for power and control. That is a Civil War no matter what Bush wants to call it!

We too would fire on foreign military aircraft that would fly across our country

The danger from Saddam was dealt with in the Gulf War when we reduced his military capability to a marginal level. He had no ability to attack the U.S. in 2002. Hell he could not conduct military operations in the northern and Sothern sections of Iraq! He could not have produced the mushroom clouds Bush and Cheney used to scare the U.S because he did not have such weapons and the intelligence about that was known by Bush and was CORRECT! The entire danger to the U.S was hype. Iran and North Korea were FAR GREATER dangers to our country in 2002 then Iraq. We also diverted our attention from Afghanistan where 9/11 was planned and today that situation is getting worse by the day!

"All the wars that you listed except for the Spanish American war, which is a lot like Iraq, were taking place before we became involved and the posed a very real threat to our country."

I defy you to explain to me how America was threatened in WWI, Korea, Vietnam, etc.

"The Iraq war was a preemptive war of choice against a country that had no capability to attack the United States."

If world history begins for you in 2003, maybe. For the rest of us, we recall that there was another war, which led to a ceasefire, which Hussein violated. We recall Hussein paying bounties to suicide bombers, continuing his threats, importing weapons technology, trying to arrange assassinations, etc.

So... if you want to make the case that we were somehow more threatened by Korea or Vietnam than we were Hussein, knock yourself out. You'll need something more than exclamation points, though!!!

"We too would fire on foreign military aircraft that would fly across our country"

Hussein agreed to the terms of that agreement, and they were there specifically to prevent him from slaughtering Kurds and Shia. Something you don't consider to be of much import, evidently. That sounded eerily like you actually thought Hussein had a RIGHT to shoot at our planes.

Bakerstreet

WWI threatened Europe to which this country and its prosperity have been tied. To have allowed Germany to take over Europe would have harmed the United States.

Korea was responding to the expansion of Communism which at the time was the greatest threat to the U.S. Vietnam was a mistake. In reality, like Iraq, it was a Civil war and we supported a government that the majority of the people did not support. I will agree that Vietnam, Iraq and the Spanish American Wars were not justified. It seems every so many years we got involved in a war that we would have been better not to have fought. That will be the reality of Iraq!

The fact Saddam shot at our aircraft did not threaten the U.S. or justify the invasion. We took the appropriate action when we were fired upon by Saddam. We have destabilized Iraq and no one knows what the long term impact of that will be. We have added to the radical enemies we had in the Moslem world. We have harmed our military by the over commitment the Iraq war imposed on it. We have destroyed our creditability among both our friends and enemies thought the world. The Iraq War was a mistake on very many fronts! Bush was warned about the dangers of this action. He ignored those warnings by people that were far wiser then he was and we will pay the price for a long time to come.

He is a FAILURE as a President at just about everything he did. He was a failure because things he should have done he failed to do. The way he served as President will serve as a capstone to a career that is one failure after another.

What a waste of bandwidth

In WWII Japan attacked us and Germany was allied with Japan and was in the process of destroying Europe.

Maybe, but did Hitler attack us? I think not! Nor did "any" of the others you cited. Why won't you just admit when you are defeated and accept your shame?

The fact Saddam shot at our aircraft did not threaten the U.S. or justify the invasion.

Excuse me? The last I knew, shooting at or downing a vessel/aircraft of the US was considered an act of war!