[Alberta's Child]

Those are certainly valid points.

But what's even more telling is that the "it may still happen" scenario you presented would be the result of this administration's idiotic decision in the aftermath of 9/11 to topple one of the most secular, moderate governments in the Middle East at the time (the Ba'athist government in Iraq).

Some of us are still wondering why there was such a compelling need to invade Iraq -- while at the same time radical Islamic governments such as those in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc. were left unscathed (particularly in light of the fact that something like 16 of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi nationals). If that makes me a "troll" here on FreeRepublic, then so be it.

[noDixieCan]

What planet do you live on?

[StarCMC]

"this administration's idiotic decision in the aftermath of 9/11 to topple one of the most secular, moderate governments in the Middle East at the time (the Ba'athist government in Iraq)."

So, you would then have had us look the other way in WWII when Hitler was gassing the Jews because he didn't like them? How can you call that government moderate when it tortured and killed thousands of its own people? When they were on their way (by all accounts at the time) to having nuclear weapons and refused, FOR YEARS, to allow the UN in to verify their compliance? When they stole aid for the welfare of their own people and used it to produce weapons? Maybe we should have just waited 'til they send a nuke into Israel? I really hope I misunderstood what you said, and please let me know if I did.

[unionblue83]

Good thing he was so moderate....just ask the Kurds and the Shiites (Chem weapon victims) how moderate he was. Nice to see you trolling about today. Don't worry I won't be here long. I will agree that we should have gone after the more radical governments in the ME at the same time but I would put Iran, Syria and the PA at the top of the list.

[Steve_Seattle]

" . . . this administration's idiotic decision in the aftermath of 9/11 to topple one of the most secular, moderate governments in the Middle East at the time (the Ba'athist government in Iraq)."

This is the first time I've ever heard anyone describe Saddam's regime as "moderate." But we WERE told it was the most secular in the Middle East, and that is precisely one of the reasons why we choose to invade it. We thought the transition to democracy would be facilitated by the secularism. But now we are finding out that that "secular" image was largely false, and that the country - like all the other Muslim countries - is a hotbed of religious fanaticism, clericalism, sectarianism, and tribalism.

[roses of sharon]

Yes, I know that some were for the continued "containment" of Saddam and Sons.

But the Administration and other countries refused after 9/11 to depend entirely of the predictability of a madman with billions for WMD and WMD capabilities, in an nuke arms race with Iran, funding of Islamic cults, failure to live up to surrender agreements, ect.

It was prudent to defeat Saddam and Sons, imo.

In time, the bombs may fall in SA, and Pak, it depends on how strong the enemy proves to be, how much support they have, can their moderates defeat them, and can our public take it.

And can a suicidal enemy be defeated ultimately? And can Western leaders, or any leaders fight without worry his population will be blow up at their malls everyday? Can a leader risk that kind of blackmail?

Many, many questions for our public to ask themselves and future Presidents and Congresses.

[Eagle of Liberty]

Some of us are still wondering why there was such a compelling need to invade Iraq

You must be one of those whose memory of world history began on January 20, 2001.

[jveritas]

Some of us are still wondering why there was such a compelling need to invade Iraq

To topple Saddam terrorist regime and to make Iraq the grave yard of terrorists. It is in Iraq where the terrorists chose to fight us and it is in Iraq where we are killing and capturing them in the tens of thousands. Also it is in Iraq where we are fighting the two other terrorist regimes of Iran and Syria.

[Blue State Insurgent]

Ah, poor little red diaper baby. Are you mad that W ruined Saddam's perfectly good socialist paradise?

What was so moderate about Saddam's genocide?

[swarthyguy]

>>>>>>while at the same time radical Islamic governments such as those in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc

Sheesh, and give up the Holy Saudi Gravy Train?

There was too much money for a minor nit like attacks in NYC and DC to make a difference. What would you do. Go after the people who were responsible for the attacks when doing that would have upset the whole money machine.

Saddam was like Hitler, dontcha know.