What Will Critics Of Iraq Say Now That Reconciliation Is Under Way?

IBD ^ | February 21, 2008 | Charles Krauthammer

[Alberta's Child]

Post #20 would apply to your message, too.

[Alberta's Child]

Actually, many at the time estimated that the deaths could exceed 30,000.

And some people estimated that there would be no combat deaths at all. In fact -- during the months leading up to the invasion of Iraq, infamous "neo-con" Richard Perle actually made the bizarre prediction that the U.S. could topple Saddam Hussein's Ba'athist regime without sending ANY combat troops to Iraq.

That's the kind of nonsense that should have shredded any credibility someone like that ever had.

What I find most remarkable about this war is that the current administration (and this would be no different if Al Gore or John Kerry were in the White House, so it's not even a partisan issue) can actually keep a straight face when it executes a so-called "war on terror" halfway around the world while at the same time: (1) pushing for free and open access to this country by foreign invaders across our southern border; and (2) insisting that the world's primary sponsors and financial supporters of radical Islam (the Saudi royal family) are "our friends."

Oh . . . and now we have the U.S. standing up and formally recognizing an Islamic state in Europe (Kosovo), too.

Y'all must be kidding me.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

If the American public had been told back in 2002 that the U.S. invasion of Iraq would result -- at a cost of thousands of American lives and hundreds of billions of dollars -- in the establishment of an Iraq in which Islam is enshrined as the official state religion, they would have rightly decided that it wasn't worth it.

"War on Terror," my @ss.<

This is what I was responding to. Your conservative credentials may be valid, similar to those of Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan, but your opinion of the situation in Iraq, as is thiers, relies on selective information, selected to exclude other important facts.

Should we have ejected Saddam from Kuwait?
Should we have allowed Saddam to thumb his nose at the cease fire he signed to save his butt after that war despite 17 UN resolutions condemning him while UN honchos as well as those from Russia, Germany and France profited from the situation?
Should we have destroyed the Taliban in Afghanistan?
Would Saddam have supported the Taliban and al Quaeda in Afghanistan
Would he have supplied WMD to the terrorists? It is foolish to deny he had them since he had demonstrated he did by using them.
We are still having difficulty in Afghanistan because of the safe havens the terrorists are given in Pakistan and the support they get from Iran, Syria, and Hezballah (from Syria, Iran and Lebanon). Would even more support from Iraq have turned the tide in their favor?
Will a stable, democracy-loving, US-friendly Iraq make a difference in the ME?

This list could go on and on but it brings up important facts that those of your belief must purposely ignore in order to hold your view.

[DGHoodini]

...and if w3e had not taken our Saddams regime, and he and his co-conspirators had started a new ME war, there’d be 4,000 dead each week, or even each day, in a war that would still be a hot oner to this day, if not an atomic one.

Tell me, under those conditions, how much oiol do you think Iraq and Iean would be shipping out through the Straights of Hormuz?