Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#17
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Larry Cable wrote:
Why was invading Iraq the right strategic move? I'm trying to think... (and deleted a bunch of sentences putting words in your mouth). The biggest reason, aside from the general fact that Saddam is the most murderous ******* since Stalin or the Khymer Rouge, is as an object lesson to countries that continued to support radical islamist groups. The success or recent failures of the group depend on governments that are willing to allow them to train and stage in their countries. Whether or not that Al Qeada actually trained or was supported by Iraq is fairly irrelavent, I don't know why any of the Bush administration even mentioned. There has always been a tie between the Iraqis and Al Qaeda, that's why Clinton bombed the factory in the Sudan, owned by Bin Laden and supplying the Iraqis. While I think the response was ineffective, the intelligence there seem to have been correct. Glad I asked! I thought you were going to mention the strategic importance of oil. Hard to say how many Saddam killed. Excluding wars, which maybe I shouldn't, it was probably fewer than Tutsis killed by Hutus in Rwanda. It seems to be true that Saddam supported Palestinian suicide bombers. That "terra" justification implies we are fighting a proxy war for Israel. Such a thing would not seem advisable on grounds of US national interest, unlike the quest for cheaper oil. Is it worth killing (what is it now, almost 800) American soldiers to protect Israel? Not to mention tax $$s. I saw a webpage claiming Iraq was behind the first WTC (van) bombing, but there was never any follow-up. Another conspiracy-oriented website said Iraq was behind the Oklohoma City bombing although that's even less likely. Bottom line: Iraq supported terror, but probably not against the USA. I do believe that this is all out war between the Islamist and the West. If we in the US and the West are not willing to take direct action against countries that provide support of terrorist groups, then we lose. However it's worth nothing that Islam, especially fundamentalist Islam, is by no means modern. These guys are not exactly going to make scientific discoveries and exceed the west in knowledge of and capability for warfare. It's almost like we're fighting old men. Islam is an imperialistic religion however, so maybe what scares western elites is its strangely strong appeal and rejection of modern global-trade values. Already you see some results, Libya coming in from the cold, the Saudis Government, and perhaps more importantly, religious leaders denoucing suicide bombings and terrorist murders. Even Iran is softening its hardline stance. IMO, if we pull out now, we have just paved the way for the Islamist to operate openly in every Arab nation in the Middle East. I recuse myself from further comment, being partly of Armenian heritage and a Tashnak sympathizer. |