Quote:
Originally posted by Rudey
1) So honestly should we wait until a country has bombs to attack? How in the world can we ever touch the North Koreans?
2) The region, not just Iraq, is a hot bed for terrorism, correct? Shouldn't a transformation in the region follow from changes in Iraq because of it's literal location within the middle east? My only issue with regional transformation is that instead of really devoting themselves to it, America is stretched thin in Iraq and Iran has now become the regional super power and is financing so much of terrorism from Syria to Iraq to Lebanon to Israel.
3) There was evidence that the food for oil program and other restrictions were being skirted and Europeans and Saddam pocketed quite a bit (to be fair, so did some filthy Americans). Combined with an interest to restart his program...and then what? When do we interfere?
4) Someone should come clean? Who? So many people across the political spectrum wanted to go in. There was intelligence that they relied on that they felt it was the right thing to do.
5) Come clean only concentrates on the negative and not the positive. What if real change does come about? I know we're dying in there. It upsets me. But the what if is all about faith and I will wait and see what happens after the election to see whether my faith really shouldn't be there.
-Rudey
|
1. No we shouldn't, I understood after 9/11 that this was going to be tough. I also thought that Bin Laden was the big fish at the moment. After he was taken care we could venture into Iraq. Trying to do both (where both enemies could blend into the background) was suicide.
2. I agree with that but 1) I don't think war was necessary to achieve that goal and 2) yes you do stretch yourself thin, especially if you go in unprepared.
3. Food for Oil, should've been better monitoring of that program period. no excuse for what went down with that. That was UN affair and we went in w/o UN approval. We interfere when we have a strong case. Any local drug dealer can get off with the case that we had against Saddam. It was weak from the get go.
4. That intelligence also wasn't 100 percent accuate. I think the intelligence might have been half-arse at best but somebody in the White House should have enough knowledge to see it as that and to say "Look this isn't enough" Suspicion isn't enought to start a war.
5. What are the positives? A mistake can't be fixed until it's recognized. Sometimes you got to acknowledge the negatives before you can build upon the positives. If not you're living in a false sense of reality. I agree, I pray real change will come about and I BELIEVE real change will come about because those poor Iraqis deserve that much. I just question the methods.