Town Square

Post a New Topic

Sixth anniversary of Iraq war to be marked

Original post made on Mar 18, 2009

Members of the Peninsula Peace and Justice Center will gather at Lytton Plaza in downtown Palo Alto Thursday evening to mark the sixth anniversary of the start of the war in Iraq.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, March 18, 2009, 10:32 AM

Comments (30)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Rumsfield
a resident of Stanford
on Mar 18, 2009 at 11:20 am

Hard to believe it is 6 years already. World War 2 only lasted 4 years (at least the USA part of that war).


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Sharon
a resident of Midtown
on Mar 18, 2009 at 11:28 am


The cold war lasted 45 years.

The 20th Century 30yrs war lasted from 1914 till 1945 in reality.

The War on Drugs is now 40yrs old and we are still loosing

Just to put things in the correct perspective


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Rumsfield
a resident of Stanford
on Mar 18, 2009 at 11:56 am

Not as long as the Vietnam War either.
I hope this is not the start of another cold war.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Paul
a resident of Downtown North
on Mar 18, 2009 at 12:11 pm

Cheer up, all you Barcalounger warriors out there. Your flat screens need not go blank soon. There was the 30 Years War, and the 100 Years War.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by A Noun Ea Mus
a resident of Professorville
on Mar 18, 2009 at 4:37 pm

Well now that it's a fad to declare WAR on everything, maybe we can fake the Iraq War as "a WAR on TERROR" and extend the time line on for a century or so.

From a certain standpoint it might be right to view both WW I and WW II as a continuum. But from the twenties into the mid thirties there was relative peace.

The War on Drugs is a big joke, calling that a war is the lamest thing.

War on Poverty, Drugs, Obesity, Smoking, Flatulence, Fungal Nail Infections, ......

How about a War on Stupid Wars?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Sharon
a resident of Midtown
on Mar 18, 2009 at 4:48 pm


In the earlier 30 yrs War, 2 out of 5 Europeans died.

The Iraq war is pretty much over, it has been a civil war for some years, when we pull out too early there will be a very bloody full civil war, just like there was when we declared defeat in Vietnam.

In fact we won the Tet Offensive hands down, it was the new left and the yellow press at home in the USA that caused the deaths of millions in Vietnam and Cambodia.
The Kerry and Fonda legacy, some how the aging new left has great nostalgia for that failure and they look to Obama to reenact it.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis
a resident of Midtown
on Mar 18, 2009 at 5:41 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

The Saddam cheering section heard from again. Nice to know some folk are impregnable to learning from reality.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Midtown
on Mar 18, 2009 at 5:56 pm

When are the Peace and Justice folks going to hold a Lytton Plaza gathering commemorating the multiple PEACEful votes that up to 80% of Iraq have participated in, and the JUSTICE that comes from having a constitution and a rule of law, for and by the people of Iraq, for the first time since..ever??


 +   Like this comment
Posted by George
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Mar 18, 2009 at 6:00 pm

Are you suggesting that Saddam wasn't acting with Peace and Justice in mind when he gassed 100,000 Kurds in the gas attack? Shouldn't we have just left Saddam to live in peace and start wars whenever he want to kill?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis
a resident of Midtown
on Mar 19, 2009 at 6:07 am

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

There will always be simple fools who decry the need for firefighters to get everything wet while suppressing fires. The Hitlers and Saddams of the world rely on the Chamberlains and the Raging Grannies to watch their six.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Paul
a resident of Downtown North
on Mar 19, 2009 at 12:34 pm

"In fact we won the Tet Offensive hands down"

You might ask John Kerry about that. He was in Vietnam, shooting and being shot at, unlike one George W Bush who stayed home to joyride jet airplanes at taxpayer expense.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Gary
a resident of Downtown North
on Mar 19, 2009 at 4:01 pm

Typically, Don Kazak is pushing another leftie propaganda piece. The raging grannies just like to rage. The so-called "peace and justice" group has nothing to do with either. Both groups would probably feel better if they learned to drink tea in the afternoons, and discuss their lost cause.

Iraq is a Mission Accomplished...as long as Obama stays the course.

Let the lefties, like Kazak just howl at the moon...like Harry Reid has done.

Well done, George W. Bush.

We have a real opportunity in Palo Alto to learn how victory and liberation was achieved, if we provide an opportunity for Condi Rice and Don Rumsfeld to speak to us (in peace, with no no raging grandmas).


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Paul
a resident of Downtown North
on Mar 19, 2009 at 4:13 pm

Now now, Gary, don't you fret. We won't let the grandmas hurt you.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Gary
a resident of Downtown North
on Mar 19, 2009 at 4:25 pm

Actually, Paul, teh pink grandmas can be more damaging than you, by a long shot. Don't flatter yourself...you have no say, so you best not think that you do.

These leftie grandmas used to be the young pink diaper women who were singing the praises of Fidel Castro and Ho Chi Minh and Mao. They had loud mouths back then, and they still do. I would advise you, man to man, to just ignore them...they have nothing valuable to say, but they will not allow you to forget about your own pink diapers.

Good luck, Paul!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Rumsfield
a resident of Stanford
on Mar 19, 2009 at 4:50 pm

Have they found the WMD's yet?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Gary
a resident of Downtown North
on Mar 19, 2009 at 5:01 pm

"Have they found the WMD's yet?"

Even better than that, they captured the guy who used them on his own people. He got hanged.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Paul
a resident of Downtown North
on Mar 19, 2009 at 5:18 pm

"they will not allow you to forget about your own pink diapers"

You have some truly weird obsessions, Gary.

But tell me: isn't pink a diluted form of Repub Red, which is Commie Red reincarnated? I thought blue was the current leftie color.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Gary
a resident of Downtown North
on Mar 19, 2009 at 6:20 pm

"You have some truly weird obsessions, Gary."

I probably do, but I'm not tellin'.

In the meantime, if you do not understand the notion of pink diaper babies, I cannot help you. Are you a current high school student?

BTW, pink is a mixture of red and white, not red and blue. Make of it what you want. You clearly don't have a clue about 20th century history.

OK, man-to-boy here: Avoid the pink diaper grandmas. To put it another way, avoid irrationality...there is no winning that argument, especially with grandmas.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by A Noun Ea Mus
a resident of Professorville
on Mar 19, 2009 at 6:50 pm

Who really won the Tet Offensive?

From a purely military viewpoint one surely could argue it was the USA.

But for years leading up to that point the press had been pathetically touting the daily body count, that the war was almost over, the enemy is on the ropes.

So when the offensive happened it caught the USA and the puppet army/state by utter surprise. A cartoon had LBJ on the phone to the US embassy in Saigon shouting "what the hell is Ho Chi Minh doing answering the phone there". The attack happened simultaneously in virtually every part of the country. It could only have been pulled off by the widespread popular support that the National Liberation Front (Viet Cong) enjoyed.

But yes, when it was over the attacks didn't succeed militarily. Thousands of Vietnamese patriots sacrificed their lives in the effort. It was an inspiration to people the world over, and still is.


And, despite the military setback the Vietnamese were not in any mood to surrender one bit. The Viet Cong village militia were integrated into NVA units. This stood in stark contrast to the comedy of the Saigon forces. They tried to go head to head with the NVA in Laos and, even with air support, went scurrying out hanging onto the helicopters.

What spring loaded the political victory of the Tet Offensive was the overt bragging and bravado, not acknowledging the tenaciousness of the "enemy". Ho Chi Minh said they'd lose ten for ever one of the enemy (French, USA, whatever) but eventually the invaders would tire of the fight.

So you can add up 10,000 defeats and it adds up in total to a victory. When we left it didn't really open it up to a civil war. The Peace Treaty was really a disguised surrender agreement. The NVA still had forces on the ground and everyone knew what the final outcome would be. The Saigon side tried to grab land and when the NVA pushed back the panic and collapse was astounding even to them.

Millions died in Cambodia, but the Nixon administration got rid of Sihanouk which left only the Khmer Rouge as a credible counter. They had been bottled up in basic prisons along the border (read "Brother Number One" for an account). Sihanouk had a deal whereby the border areas were allowed to be used as a Ho Chi Minh Trail extension in exchange for not supporting the Khmer Rouge (they actually hated the Vietnamese).

Millions did not die in Vietnam in any kind of post liberation holocaust. I'm sure many did get some type of justice meted out to them, which they deserved for betraying their country anyway.

Now the Iraq War is just a hiccup of history. We sent thousands of our troops to that country in a war based on a calculated lie. The "insurgents" there were hardly of the political or military caliber of the Vietnamese. Just a mix of sectarian religious based upheaval. When the dust settles over it all the only real winner will be Iran. We sent thousands to die for a lie, and Iran will be the only winner down the road.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Gary
a resident of Downtown North
on Mar 19, 2009 at 7:27 pm

"Now the Iraq War is just a hiccup of history. We sent thousands of our troops to that country in a war based on a calculated lie."

That is a lie, at both levels.

"When the dust settles over it all the only real winner will be Iran. We sent thousands to die for a lie, and Iran will be the only winner down the road. "

That is another lie. In fact, Iran will be the big loser, as Iraq prospers under a reasonably democratic rule, especially if Iraq keeps America involved in its security affairs. Iran is the big loser in this thing...IF Obama stays the course.







 +   Like this comment
Posted by A Noun Ea Mus
a resident of Professorville
on Mar 20, 2009 at 3:11 pm

So it's a lie that the war was concocted based on lies? Every credible report clearly has established that the whole WMD thing was concocted, that Iraq had no connection to either Al Queda or 9/11. Yet it was all consciously and cynically spun, with obvious contempt for the very idea of being honest and above board with the public, in order to use the 9/11 tragedy to launch the New Colonialism agenda of the Project for a New American Century gang.

So what was won and lost in the bungled and idiotic war on Iraq?

I guess one could say we "won" in that Saddam Hussein was overthrown, cite his hideous and brutal history. Yet that history and those crimes were never a problem at all when it was Iran he was after, when his faction of the Baath Party was manipulated to massacre the more left leaning faction decades earlier.

I guess one could say we "won" after thousands died in sectarian massacres, from starvation, hundreds of thousands have fled the country. And our tax dollars are now just paying former insurgents not to shoot at our troops. Meanwhile, of the Shiite factions, the Maliki gov. is based on the traditional upper crust Shia population. They have always been close to Iran and that continues to this day. The Bani Sadr faction is more based on the street and is a rival to the Maliki based faction. But Iran has chips on every spot on the Iraqi Roulette table.

What was lost?

For one thing the Project for a New American Century had the Iraq war as it's kickoff event. They gutter-balled the whole thing in a wasteful fiasco that boggles the mind. So I doubt they can continue their Crusade (and that's what the Muslim world sees it as--not without some justification considering the rabid Christian nature and pronouncements of some of the key players).

It wasted billions of tax dollars, which stands in stark relief to the desperate need evident across the economy.

Thousands of our soldiers lost their lives. Many more were grievously wounded. How can anyone look their parents or loved ones in the eye and pretend in any way that this was worth it?

We are not safer because of our mis-adventure in Iraq. It has only inflamed the Muslim and Arab world against us. Further, it was a costly diversion from the real valid goal of going after Al Queda in Afghanistan. Now they are consolidated in Pakistan, twisted into a little social knot with the Taliban (and their ethnic constituency in the south), the tribal population, and also have considerable popular support among Pakistan as well.

What a mess.

And some of you think you should crack open the champagne and toast a victory?!!

If this is a victory, I'd hate to see a defeat.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Gary
a resident of Downtown North
on Mar 20, 2009 at 3:30 pm

"So it's a lie that the war was concocted based on lies? "

Yes.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by A Noun Ea Mus
a resident of Professorville
on Mar 20, 2009 at 7:13 pm

So you believe the nonsense? (I'll be charitable and call it nonsense).


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Gary
a resident of Downtown North
on Mar 20, 2009 at 8:11 pm

"So you believe the nonsense?"

No.

I believe the truth.

Saddam is dead. Iraq is liberated. Al qaeda got its ass kicked in Iraq. It was a stake through the heart of the jihadists. Iraq now has the opportunity to become its potential...and that would be a great thing for the Middle East, and the world.

Once again, thank you, GWB.

Moose, you need to get off the nonsense treadmill. Your rantings are not charitable to you.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Midtown
on Mar 22, 2009 at 6:55 am

As long as people believe we went into Iraq only because of WMDs, after giving them 6 months to get rid of and hide them, they will believe what Saddam Hussein wanted them to believe ..."Look, Mom, clean hands!".

They will never remember the inspectors being kicked out of their jobs, the 17 ignored UN Resolutions, the defecting sons-in-law who pinpointed the nuclear weapons and bio programs ( and who were delivered home to wifeys in pieces after they were promised a safe return by Saddam Hussein), the head of the bio weapons program bragging to Barbara Walters on national TV about her program, the videotaped massacres with chemical weapons and bullets, the invasions and the torture.

These are all simply a bunch of inconvenient truths for them.

In the meantime, the first Iraq Tour Group just got home to Britain full of praises for the wonderful country they just visited. How many were there in the 30 years of Saddam's rule? Unless you want to count CNN who sold their soul to stay there so they could repeat propoganda, not news,you can't find any "tour groups" going to Iraq for fun. A little dangerous for Westerners at that point. A little dangerous for 80% of Iraqis, also, but they were stuck there.

Still waiting for the Peace and Justice group to hold a rally celebrating the peace and justice the Iraqis finally have, not thanks to the Peace and Justice crows.How long do ya think that will take?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Midtown
on Mar 22, 2009 at 6:56 am

You will never believe it, but I meant Peace and Justice crowds, not crows..


 +   Like this comment
Posted by johnhkennedy
a resident of another community
on Mar 22, 2009 at 9:35 am

johnhkennedy is a registered user.

There was no doubt that 9-11, like Pearl Harbor, needed to be avenged,
but Bush had another agenda.

Bush, Cheney, and appointees lied about WMD, aluminum tubes, and Niger Uranium to con Congress into approving an invasion of Iraq, a country that did not have anything to do with 9-11.

In WW-II, in 4 years, FDR put 13,000,000 men in the fight, beat 3 dictatorships, their leaders dead at the end.

After 7 years of War On Terror, neither Bush nor Cheney could find Osama Bin Laden, our US reputation is in the gutter, we're still at war, over 4,200 US Soldiers are dead, over 30,000 maimed for the Bush-Cheney arrogance and lies. They ordered Torture, a violation of Federal Law.

If we as a people hope to force our public officials to obey our laws and our Constitution,
the time is Now
and the way to do it is
to prosecute members of the Bush administration
who violated Federal Laws,
including the law against Torturing prisoners.

The reason that we continue to have unnecessary wars of choice is
that our Congress makes excuses for lawbreaking officials instead of impeaching or prosecuting them.

Unless Obama's statement that “no one is above the law" is a lie,
Obama must appoint a Special Prosecutor for Bush, Cheney and the appointee lawyers that advocated Torture, violated many Federal Laws, our Constitution & the Geneva Convention on Torture.

Sign The Petition To Prosecute them

Web Link

.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Gary
a resident of Downtown North
on Mar 22, 2009 at 6:35 pm

GWB did better than avenge 9-11. He let it be known that the USA is serious about destroying the jihadists, along with challenging various other countries supporting them and their ilk. He started with Afghanistan, which was appropriate, then he followed on with Iraq, which had already used WMD...and could esaily hand them off, without fingerprints, to al qaeda types (enemy of my enemy...motivation). There were several other reasons to depose Saddam, but this was good enough.

There were no lies, just some miscalculations. Considering the miscalculations by FDR and Churchill in WWII, and Lincoln in the Civil War, GWB looks very good by comparison.

Hirohito remained alive after WWII, so no, FDR did not kill all three leaders. Remember, it was Hirohito's Japan that attacked us, not Hitler's Germany. In fact, FDR moved military resources away from the Pacific theatre after Pearl Harbor, so that he could pursue his war of choice against Hitler.

Considering the relative costs vs. benefits, the Iraq war looks very good vs. WWII.

There was no federal law against waterboarding (if that is what you mean by torture). In fact, it is used on a regular basis as a training technique on our own special forces troops. If Obama has any sense to him, he will continue to use it, when the chips are on the table...after all, it works exceedingly well, and we are always told by lefties that torture does not work (thus, it cannot, logically, be torture). Waterboarding has saved many innocent lives. It is a blessed thing.

Obama has a lot to worry about, and he is not doing a very good job, thus far. I doubt that he wants to take up your challenge to support prosecutions against Bush...what goes around comes around, after all.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Paul
a resident of Downtown North
on Mar 23, 2009 at 5:53 pm

"Hirohito remained alive after WWII, so no, FDR did not kill all three leaders."

Those who know not their history are condemned to invent it.

Since FDR died 4 months before Japan's surrender ended WWII, FDR was not making life or death decisions about Hirohito or anyone else.

"Remember, it was Hirohito's Japan that attacked us, not Hitler's Germany."

The fact is Japan attacked us very shortly before Germany declared war on us. A declaration of war by Germany was an impossible thing to ignore at the time. Take your meds, Gary, let them do their thing, and read some history.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Gary
a resident of Downtown North
on Mar 23, 2009 at 6:27 pm

FDR put MacArthur in charge, and he specifically spared Hirohito. FDR would not have crossed MacArthur, in the context of the times. Truman went along for the ride. Hirohito lived. That is pure history, like it or not.

Hitler read the tea leaves, and decided to decalre war ASAP after Japan attacked us. FDR wanted war against Germany, not Japan...that was his choice. FDR was very clever to sucker Hitler into declaring war. FDR was a very clever fox...he wanted his war of choice, and he got it...and I fully support him for doing it (on a moral basis).

Paul, I must say that you have next to NO understanding of the history of that period. Are you a PA high school student? If so, who is your American history teacher?

Yawn....


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

WUE makes out-of-state tuition more affordable
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 2 comments | 2,603 views

Local picks on 2015 Michelin Bib Gourmand list
By Elena Kadvany | 1 comment | 2,396 views

Ode to Brussels Sprout
By Laura Stec | 14 comments | 2,195 views

Go Giants! Next Stop: World Series!
By Chandrama Anderson | 1 comment | 1,689 views

In Defense of "Incivility"
By Douglas Moran | 17 comments | 1,608 views