The best case result from the invasion would be to help Iraq become a beachhead of liberalism in the Arab world, something that could be a source of Muslim pride without being a threat to us. That was the President’s goal, and it’s a laudable one.
I thought President Chimpy went to war to rid Iraq of WMDs? Or was that just a lie? It’s pretty convenient how Bush keeps changes goals, strategies, tactics, and whatnot.
Iran would still have its nuclear program, and that would push Saddam to restart his own.
Under Clinton, none of these countries had nucular weapons. It was only when Bush unleashed this misguided war that Iran and North Korea put their nuclear programs into overdrive. I know you would love to blame Clinton for this nuclear proliferation, but the fact is that Bush’s hard line policies actually drove it.
You want to focus on al Qaeda? They’re in Iraq.
Was Al Qaeda in Iraq before we went in there? So you think it’s a good thing that Bush’s policies have helped Al Qaeda spread from Afghanistan to Iraq?
If you think fighting us in Iraq pays off for them in recruitment and training opportunities, what do you think beating us in Iraq would do for them? If we stay there, al Qaeda gets to choose between sacrificing lots of their people in attacks on the best military in the world or burning through their goodwill in the region by killing Muslim civilians.
Actually, most of our soldiers are killed by IEDs. Our soldiers rarely even see “the enemy.”
We leave, and they can train for attacks on American civilians in peace.
Just like your boy, you sure do have a black and white view of the world. Why do we have to stop fighting terrorists if we leave Iraq? The way I see it, if we leave Iraq we can get back to fighting actual terrorists as opposed to mediating a civil war.
