pageok
pageok
pageok
Iraq War Photograph Book:

Just got This Is Our War, a book of "Servicemen's Photographs of Life in Iraq" (Devin Friedman & the Editors of GQ, eds.) -- very interesting.

Allen Asch (mail) (www):
5.18.2006 3:25pm
Splunge (mail):
Ah...so the standard here is, once you shake hands with someone, you're a weasel and a hypocrite if twenty years later you come to regard him as an enemy of your country?

Is there any limit on the "blackout" period? I mean, if forty years had elapsed between the handshake and the war, would Mr. Rumsfeld still have been pond scum to have changed his mind about Mr. Hussein?
5.18.2006 3:37pm
WAL:

Is there any limit on the "blackout" period? I mean, if forty years had elapsed between the handshake and the war, would Mr. Rumsfeld still have been pond scum to have changed his mind about Mr. Hussein?



No way, it's why we're simultaneously responsible for Saddam Hussein being in power, millions of kids starving, oppression of the Shia, etc. prior to Iraq's invasion and are hypocrites and the starters of an unnecessary war post invasion.

The important thing is being able to attack either Bush and co. or the U.S. somehow.
5.18.2006 3:57pm
Allen Asch (mail) (www):

the standard here is, once you shake hands with someone, you're a weasel and a hypocrite if twenty years later you come to regard him as an enemy of your country?

I only posted one sentence, yet you skipped over the most relevant phrase: "After US Intelligence Reports Saddam Has Used Weapons of Mass Destruction."

So, including the part you skipped, here is a revised standard:

once you shake hands with someone after US intelligence reports to you he has used WMDs, you're a weasel and a hypocrite if twenty years later you come to regard him as an enemy of your country for having used WMDs.
5.18.2006 4:35pm
WAL:

you're a weasel and a hypocrite if twenty years later you come to regard him as an enemy of your country for having used WMDs.



I think Rumsfeld regarded Saddam Hussein as an enemy to our country because he constantly shot at our planes trying to enforce the no-fly zone, celebrated 9/11, broke the peace treaty of the first gulf war, tried to assassinate an ex-President, uttered death to the U.S. stuff all the time, aided the families of suicide bombers and assisted terrorist groups.

Of course, he did that stuff for a decade and for a decade he was an enemy of the U.S. The WMDs meant we had to have done something about it. That was wrong. Rumsfeld was wrong. Feel free to argue there were bigger enemies of the the U.S. But if Saddam Hussein was not an enemy of the America pre-war, what would he have had to have done to become one?
5.18.2006 5:03pm
Houston Lawyer:
I'll just avoid posting pictures of FDR and Stalin. Who your enemies are usually becomes clearer over time.
5.18.2006 5:10pm
Allen Asch (mail) (www):
WAL wrote:

I think Rumsfeld regarded Saddam Hussein as an enemy to our country because he constantly shot at our planes trying to enforce the no-fly zone, celebrated 9/11, broke the peace treaty of the first gulf war, tried to assassinate an ex-President, uttered death to the U.S. stuff all the time, aided the families of suicide bombers and assisted terrorist groups
Funny how WMDs didn't even make your list. Regardless of what you think Rumsfeld thought, Rumsfeld was asked in March 2003 the following question:

"In what way is Iraq a threat to the United States that would allow it to act in self-defence of American interests?"

Here is the first sentence of his response:

"The issue that's before the world, it seems to me, is the pervasiveness of weapons of mass destruction and the spread of these, the proliferation of these technologies, chemical and biological weapons, increasingly nuclear weapons." (emphasis added)
5.18.2006 5:23pm
anonymous VC loyal:
While I understand the war and all things surrounding it are hot buttons for many of us, perhaps we should step back from the bickering and look at the original post. The book is from the soldiers' view. A little respect for those doing their jobs might not go amiss here.
5.18.2006 6:13pm
WAL:
"Funny how WMDs didn't even make your list."

"Of course, he did that stuff for a decade and for a decade he was an enemy of the U.S. The WMDs meant we had to have done something about it. That was wrong. Rumsfeld was wrong. Feel free to argue there were bigger enemies of the the U.S. But if Saddam Hussein was not an enemy of the America pre-war, what would he have had to have done to become one?"
5.18.2006 6:33pm
Mike BUSL07 (mail) (www):
Why do people treat the Saddam-US relationship, as though it's a smoking gun of US hypocrisy, casting us eternally as both evil *and* short-sighted? Clearly enough, our enemy at the time was the USSR. Saddam, for all his flaws, was intended to counteract Soviet influence in the region. Indeed, that's precisely what he did.

FDR &co. had no great love for Stalin, and even less love for the idea of communism, but when Europe rolled over to Hitler, FDR and Churchill worked with Stalin - and worked with him very well.

Diplomacy does not permit you to make a stand on every value he holds dear - you have to pick your battles. In the 80's we had bigger fish to fry then Saddam. To tie Rumsfeld's involvement in those days, into some argument that he and Bush are hypocrites, is to largely - and necessarily, willingly - overlook the big picture.
5.18.2006 6:48pm
reneviht (mail) (www):
Is it hypocrisy to decide you've made a mistake, and then try to fix it?

I've never heard any official say it was a mistake, but I've come to expect political types to not mention mistakes.
5.18.2006 7:29pm
Justin (mail):
Is using WMDs bad? A) Yes B) No.

"Oh, shoot - I made a mistake. I *totally* meant to pencil A. Stupid me" - Donald Rumsfeld
5.18.2006 7:49pm
Broncos:
I'm glad that this sort of book is coming out and showing the perspective of everyday soldiers. Hopefully, it will expose the public to pictures that aren't from Abu Ghraib, and that aren't from this alleged atrocity.
5.18.2006 10:18pm