Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
"Oh, that quagmire"
Posted by: McQ on Wednesday, August 15, 2007

Dick Cheney in 1994 about the decision not to go on into Iraq and overthrow Saddam during "Desert Storm":

 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Who is that guy, and what he did he do with Dick Cheney?

That guy obviously hates America and is aiding and abetting the enemy.

Dang lilly livered liberal loser.
 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
Hmm, I wonder what happened to Dick between then and now that makes him so much cooler today? I think it was one of those last heart attacks.

Either way, they were wrong to let Saddam fester for a decade.

Yay for new Dick Cheney!
 
Written By: NeoconNews.com
URL: http://www.neoconnews.com
Going to Baghdad in 1991, would have shattered the Coalition AND would have required the UN and the Arab League to get involved in the "Nation-Building", just as they tried to insert themselves into the process in 2004. It’s one of the reasons I opposed nation-building in the 1990’s, basically it involved useless international bureaucrats sitting down with the VERY PEOPLE CAUSING THE PROBLEMS, to "solve" the problems they created, q.v. Somalia, Haiti. The end result of going to Baghdad in 1991 would have been ANOTHER Sunni dictator/strongman running Iraq, with the UN "monitoring" the situation. Not a great idea. It took too long and 9/11 to change the situation, but what happened in 2003 was a better game plan, replace Saddam, and replace him under American tutelage, rather than asking the previous kleptocratic thugs to make a "better" Iraq via bribes to the UN and Arab League.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Hmm, I wonder what happened to Dick between then and now that makes him so much cooler today? I think it was one of those last heart attacks.
I suspect something like this...
 
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
I will still hold the cancellation of the Tomcat21 and destruction of the F-14 tooling on his head. He saddled us with the Sewer Hornet. But other than that, he came around......
 
Written By: Crusader
URL: http://www.coalitionoftheswilling.net/
Tomcat21??

Oh do tell...
 
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
Crusader, get over it...the Tomcat/Bombcat was an ancient airframe...you sound like LTV, everything was an A-7 Corsair II, by the end.

The F/A-18E/F/G rule. The Super Hornet is fo schizzle.....don’t be a hatuh! Especially with the ASEA radar coming on-line, plus it’s more maintainable than the F-14. I mean just how many times are we going to "zero-out" wear and tear on an airframe, a 40-plus y.o. air frame?
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
I mean just how many times are we going to "zero-out" wear and tear on an airframe, a 40-plus y.o. air frame?
It’s.
Wings.
Moved.

If that doesn’t make it the coolest fighter jet on the planet, you aren’t a guy...
 
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
My appreciation of the moving parts of the F-14 and Kelly McGillis take a back seat to NO man....I simply question the economics of the continuation of the F-14 upgrade program, not the aesthetics.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Joe, your ego is writing checks your body can’t cash.
 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://
My appreciation of the moving parts of the F-14 and Kelly McGillis take a back seat to NO man....I simply question the economics of the continuation of the F-14 upgrade program, not the aesthetics.
Problem is, after the tooling was destroyed, all we had was rebuilds. We would have had new airframes, with longer range, improved maintainability, could carry more, plus any/all of the toys that are in the Sewer Hornet. Funny it is working for the F-15.
 
Written By: Crusader
URL: http://www.coalitionoftheswilling.net/
Joe, your ego is writing checks your body can’t cash.

That’s right! JWG... man. I am dangerous

Crusader, you are simply proposing nothing different than the Super-Bug, only on a different platform. IF I re-engine, re-engineer, re-avionic, re-wire, re-work, and re-program the F-14 I am essentially creating a NEW aircraft, all requiring essentially all the program costs associated with a new aircraft, because the F-14XX is not going to be an F-14 any more. Which is what we did with the F/A-18E/F/G, create essentially a new aircraft under the guise of a modification program, but on a much newer plaform, one that was designed as a multi-role aircraft.

And it is true that the F-15 is being upgraded and has become a tremendous multi-role plaform, but we are NOT doing the same thing there. The F-22 is replacing the F-15 in the ATA role and the F-35 with JDAMS will be taking the place of the F-15E in the ATG role, possibly with the F/A-22, one day, filling the F-15E/F-117 role for deeper strikes.

There comes a time when we have to say goodbye to our oldest friends and stuffed toys, realizing that they can no longer meet the needs being placed on them. The F-4 was a fine aircraft, but should we have held onto it or replaced it with the F-14/15/16/18? Just as we retired the mighty F-4 for the generation of aircraft you admire, rightly, we must retire our old friends and replace them with new classics.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Last I remember Dick Cheney isn’t the President.(despite the left’s numerous conspiracy rants to the opposite) I wouldn’t be surprised that pre-invasion that might have still been his private position.

Once the President makes the decision, that should be everyone in the adminstrations public position.
 
Written By: Jay Evans
URL: http://
Cheney kind of looks like a heavier-set Larry David in that clip.
 
Written By: the wolf
URL: http://
Joe,
Crusader, you are simply proposing nothing different than the Super-Bug, only on a different platform. IF I re-engine, re-engineer, re-avionic, re-wire, re-work, and re-program the F-14 I am essentially creating a NEW aircraft, all requiring essentially all the program costs associated with a new aircraft, because the F-14XX is not going to be an F-14 any more. Which is what we did with the F/A-18E/F/G, create essentially a new aircraft under the guise of a modification program, but on a much newer plaform, one that was designed as a multi-role aircraft.
Yes, just that it is/was a better platform, which was my whole point.Better range, and more room for all those new toys. The F-18 is a fine replacement for all those A-7s, F-4s and F-8s (esp with the F-14 being a strain/unable to operate off of some of the older CVs we had at the time) , but no matter how much lipstick you put on it, it is still inferior to what we had at the time to work with(F-14). The one size fits all Navy is not the best thing we have ever done, choice wise.
There comes a time when we have to say goodbye to our oldest friends and stuffed toys, realizing that they can no longer meet the needs being placed on them. The F-4 was a fine aircraft, but should we have held onto it or replaced it with the F-14/15/16/18? Just as we retired the mighty F-4 for the generation of aircraft you admire, rightly, we must retire our old friends and replace them with new classics.
See above. Why replace a system of the same generation with an inferior system? That is my point. The only difference of them is the electronics, which could/should have been upgraded on the F-14 at the same rate. If you swallow the stealth line about the Sewer Hornet, you need help.....
 
Written By: Crusader
URL: http://www.coalitionoftheswilling.net/
Scott: Well, there’s the F-111, and it wasn’t quite so cool.

And we still have the B-1B. (Hell, we probably ought to make more of ’em - today’s threat model suggests to me that they’re a more cost-effective weapon than the B-2 against the most likely targets.)
 
Written By: Sigivald
URL: http://
And we still have the B-1B. (Hell, we probably ought to make more of ’em - today’s threat model suggests to me that they’re a more cost-effective weapon than the B-2 against the most likely targets.)

Blasphemer! You sir, will not receive an invite to the USAF Christmas Party with THAT attitude!
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Going to Baghdad in 1991, would have shattered the Coalition AND would have required the UN and the Arab League to get involved in the "Nation-Building", just as they tried to insert themselves into the process in 2004. It’s one of the reasons I opposed nation-building in the 1990’s, basically it involved useless international bureaucrats sitting down with the VERY PEOPLE CAUSING THE PROBLEMS, to "solve" the problems they created, q.v. Somalia, Haiti. The end result of going to Baghdad in 1991 would have been ANOTHER Sunni dictator/strongman running Iraq, with the UN "monitoring" the situation. Not a great idea. It took too long and 9/11 to change the situation, but what happened in 2003 was a better game plan, replace Saddam, and replace him under American tutelage, rather than asking the previous kleptocratic thugs to make a "better" Iraq via bribes to the UN and Arab League.
What a joke. Going in in 1991 would have shattered the coalition, so let’s shatter it in 2003. Which was a better game plan, as is clearly evidence by the 500 billion plus, 30000 casualties, and 100000-300000 dead Iraqis.

Oh, not to mention, Iranian puppets instead of another Sunni dictator.

It’s clear that Dick was right then to say it was crazy, AND right now to be behind it 100%.

Separately ...

props to Q for showing a video I first got alerted to by MoveOn :-D
 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
The video is interesting for his use of the word Quagmire alone. Or was this the source of the term being used this time around?

Anyone think he has a time machine and this is part of his walk balk form his current Iraq position?
 
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
*shrug*

That was then. This is now.

The French and British didn’t think going to Berlin after the Nazi re-occupation of the Saar in 1936 was a worthwhile effort, either.

They thought differently a few years later, though.
 
Written By: Dale Franks
URL: http://www.qando.net
*shrug*

That was then. This is now.
Yes. And one can easily argue that one’s motive for going into Iraq had changed from unnecessary to necessary (though that will forever remain in question), but one would have great difficulty reasoning that the complications that come with an invasion had abated from 1994 to 2003.

But that’s what Cheney and others in the administration, as well as many of the frothiest of war supporters, seemed to have believed.

With comments from Dick like, “My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators.”

Yeah, 9/11 changed everything… except the many arguably overwhelming complications that would be involved in an invasion.
Once you got to Iraq and took it over, took down Saddam Hussein’s government, then what are you going to put in its place? That’s a very volatile part of the world, and if you take down the central government of Iraq, you could very easily end up seeing pieces of Iraq fly off: part of it, the Syrians would like to have to the west, part of it — eastern Iraq — the Iranians would like to claim, they fought over it for eight years. In the north you’ve got the Kurds, and if the Kurds spin loose and join with the Kurds in Turkey, then you threaten the territorial integrity of Turkey.

It’s a quagmire if you go that far and try to take over Iraq.
Where were these warnings - or more forgivingly, where were these explanations regarding the difficulties of such an endeavor, while the case for the war was being made?
*shrug*
Exactly.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider