Bloodthirsty Chickenhawks Can't Decide Whether Iraq Invasion Was The Best Ever or The Bestest Ever!!!
Are people STILL talking about Iraq, because OMG, that issooooo 10 years ago! Only dirty fucking hippies who hate America and freedom are still obsessing about embarrassing lame-o Code Pinkish questions like, "What the hell was the point of that again?" and "Did we find those weapons of mass destruction yet?" and "Could we please discuss whether it was worth it to spend thousands of lives and eleventy billion dollars to find one guy hiding in a hole in the ground?"
Richard Perle, card-carrying member of the brain trust that cooked up the half-baked Operation Yee-Haw Let's Git Us Some Oil!!!!!, says no and shut yer squeal hole, haters.
Richard Perle, the former chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board and a leading advocate for the war in Iraq, said Wednesday that it was not reasonable to ask whether the war was worth it.
NPR "Morning Edition" host Renee Montagne asked, "Ten years later, nearly 5,000 American troops dead, thousands more with wounds, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead or wounded. When you think about this, was it worth it?"
"I've got to say, I think that is not a reasonable question. What we did at the time was done in the belief that it was necessary to protect this nation. You can't, a decade later, go back and say, 'Well, we shouldn't have done that,'" Perle responded.
You see, dumb NPR lady reporter? It isn't "reasonable" to ask if it was a good idea to invade Iraq because Richard Perle says IT WAS NECESSARY even if it wasn't so don't ask if it was, m'kay?
Meanwhile, disgraced ex-lawyer for the Bush administration John Yoo, who used his big fancy law words to explain how it is totes legal to crush some little-boy testy-cles if the president gets a hankerin', gets all unreasonable with his bad self and says of course it was worth it:
I continue to think that invading Iraq was the best option in light of the information we had then -- I am finishing a book on war in the 21st century, where I make the case for preemptive and preventive war, and I argue that the proper way to think about these questions is based on the information available before the decision, not after.
Plus, we shared the booty with them:
We spent billions of dollars in Iraq as damages. We did so not because the war was wrong, but because it was right -- and we shared the benefits of the war with the Iraqi people by transferring some of it in the form of reconstruction funds.
Do you get it now? Since we basically did socialism to Iraq, redistributing the "benefits" of massive debt and casualties, we're all settled up. You're welcome, Iraq! You may give us candy and flowers and greet us as liberators any day now.
We'll let Yoo and Perle fight amongst themselves about whether Perle is dumber than a bag of hammers for not getting that the invading-Iraq-thing was OBVIOUSLY worth it, or whether Yoo is unreasonable for addressing that question in the first place. Whoever wins gets to wear the torture hoodie! But do please send us a copy of your forthcoming book, Mr. Yoo Sir, on how "preemptive" war is Teh Awesome. And please call it Crushin' Balls For Liberty! because it will amuse us, and we need a good laugh because it's better than crying.