U.S. must not repeat Iraq missteps

  • Article by: New York Times Editorial
  • Updated: March 20, 2013 - 9:04 PM

That war show why Americans need to proceed with caution on Syria and Iran.

  • 32
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
hawkeye56379Mar. 20, 13 9:13 PM

The editorial says: "Democrats as well as Republicans in Congress endorsed it."-------- Well, there were some Democrats that did, but only 111 Congressional Democrats voted for the authorization to use force if necessary and 147 voted against it.

11
3
yardboyMar. 20, 1311:05 PM

The editorial says: "Democrats as well as Republicans in Congress endorsed it." --- I guess it is a true statement then.

3
0
crystalbayMar. 21, 1312:20 AM

All but 5 Republicans backed launching this wholly disastrous, unnecessary war and the men responsible for carefully constructing the web of lies and falsehoods justifying it are still insisting it was a wise decision: Bush and Cheney. This is the single most disgraceful military endeavor ever taken by the US. Two trillion dollars and 4600+ dead young Americans later, this black eye will remain for eternity.

13
3
cstoney48Mar. 21, 13 7:24 AM

Somewhere, sometime we need to accept the reality that the United States cannot control events in every troubled region of the world. Iraq and its legacy have cost us over $2 trillion and thousands of lost and destroyed American lives--and look at the results. Was it worth it???? Why would Syria be any different???

11
0
goferfanzMar. 21, 13 7:44 AM

Oh yes, the NYT's war view and the usual lib posters propaganda about the Iraq war is always oddly misleading. The Husseins ARE dead and that is a good thing. Yes, it was a tough endeavor, but this story and comments ignore the truth. The truth is the Iraq conflict began in 1991, and was bungled from the beginning. Clinton then bombed there hundreds of days during his tenure, and his economic sanctions exacted a terrible human toll-->perhaps as much as the second war.... Clinton left this mess for W (along with Bin Laden who began the 911 planning in 1998)-->and the choices were either an Iraq lead by the Hussein clan or one with them removed. Poll questions never list that choice when asking about the war, do they? Current stories also never comment if Iraq has more violent deaths than the "utopia" of America with its 50,000 violent deaths each year. W gave Hussein the option of fleeing Iraq in 2003, and he declined. America then finished what it began in 1991. That is the truth.

0
11
mgtwinsfan1987Mar. 21, 13 7:54 AM

Goferfanz, obviously using your reasoning, if our nation has its own terror agenda, then that should militate even more against us getting rid of an evil dictator somewhere else in the world. Money would be better spent eradicating the evils in our own country first...

5
0
firefight41Mar. 21, 13 7:55 AM

In 2003, President George W. Bush and Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, used the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, to wage preemptive war against Saddam Hussein and a nuclear arsenal that did not exist. *************** They waged the attack because of WMD's not Hussein's nuclear arsenal.

2
7
sarahanneMar. 21, 1311:09 AM

Biggest reason not to intervene is that we do not have a clue what is going in that country or region. One thing that did come out of the Iraq war is that Iran is a more powerful player then they were before. What will happen in Syria will probably like in Egypt where they over threw the ruler but found out that the replacement is not much better then what they had before.

2
0
cstoney48Mar. 21, 1311:14 AM

goferfanz claims: "The truth is the Iraq conflict began in 1991, and was bungled from the beginning. Clinton then bombed there hundreds of days..." Clinton wasn't president in 1991--George H.W. Bush was and he ordered the bombing before the Allied attack. Bush I and his advisers correctly refused to be drawn into the quagmire of Iraqi political divisions and centuries of old sectarian and tribal hatreds--his goal of preserving Kuwait's integrity had been achieved with the Bush's coalition assault. Hussein, while a ruthless and immoral thug , has simply been replaced by an Iraqi government dominated by Iranian interests and subject to the factionalism that is characteristic of the fiction of an Iraqi nation. Some legacy for the cost in American lives and treasure. Syria would be more of the same. Like Iraq, Syria is a political fiction created by Europeans and simmering with historic tribal-religious rivalries and hatreds. It is quicksand...stay away!

3
0
largeloinsMar. 21, 1311:43 AM

If you want to wage war for profit you need to profit from the war like we did in WWI and WWII by building war macnines for other countries and cutting business deals while rebuilding Europe. Now days we piss our own money down the hole, get no reaturns on this investment and wonder why we are broke.

0
2

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT