I never thought boots on the ground in Iraq was a good idea.
For the life of me, I can’t understand why Bush thought it was necessary when ...
1. We already had boots on the ground in Afghanistan
2. Sadam’s air force was effectively neutralized
3. Sadam had an iron grip on the Iraqi population and had no qualms about ruthlessly killing any and all opposition, including the islamo-fascists.
4. The Christian population was as secure as anybody else in Iraq.
5. Anything that needed to be done to Iraq could be done from the air or with Black Ops.
6. Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, other than Saddam celebrating it.
7. Eventually a demonRAT would be elected that would reverse any and all gains made in Iraq, meaning that any American blood shed there would be wasted in vain.
I suppose we’ll never fully know all the “real” reasons Bush felt it was necessary to stick troops on the ground.
According to wiki leaks - Iraq did attempt to purchase yellow cake (contradicting Plame’s hubby)
I’m old enough to remember when Gore tried to appear macho & accuse Bush 41 of not finishing the job & ousting Sadaam.
Sometimes I wonder if there’s something to the theory W was taking care of unfinished business.
If I knew then what I know now I would feel differently about it. I suspect plenty of people would.
Actually, I think all of this - the second Iraq war and the ensuing deaths of thousands of Americans - can be laid at the feet of George Herbert Walker Bush.
In Desert Storm, this country and the coalition he assembled utterly routed the Iraqis from Kuwait (later, deeply into IRAQ - to the outskirts of Baghdad, even.)
Accounts of the two (or three?) F15s that massacred an entire column of fleeing Iraqis (booty and plunderings accompanying) are legendary.
Bush (1) had the power to apprehend and contain Iraq’s Hussein in his hands. Instead, he listened to a lilly-livered RINO Secretary of State (Powell) who was just in the beginnings of his own insurgency toward this government masquerading as concern for the optics of the “Highway of Death”, and Bush (1) stopped dead cold short of the prize that could have saved several thousand soldiers’ lives a decade later.
“I never thought boots on the ground in Iraq was a good idea.”
Agreed. To the extent military action needed to be taken, bomb them to smithereens. Then get out and stay out.
Another lie was “the Iraqis will pay for it with their oil revenue.” Let them build their own schools, roads, hospitals, water plants, etc., etc. But, of course, as always, the American taxpayers got stuck with the hundreds of billions of dollars of bills so that we could “win their hearts and minds.”
Saddam's violations of UN Security Council provisions, that led to the UN backing the US/allied invasion on 2003, were not just about WMD
Although the WMD assessments came from the UN inspectors themselves who were increasingly blocked by Saddam from inspections - yet another violation of UN security council provisions (why?) - and most foreign intel services, not just the US community
Russia itself right after 9-11 warned Pres Bush that another terror attack was planned from Iraq - maybe disinformation (if so why? since the Russians had some in country advisors and control over Iraqi WMD which was reported being convoyed by Russians under diplomatic protection out of Iraq and into Syria, just before the 2003 invasion); the Russian warning added to the information Bush had about follow-on threats in the first 30-90 days after 911
You may disagree with Pres Bush's case
But you can't say you didn't understand it unless you didn't try
“For the life of me, I can’t understand why Bush thought it was necessary when ...”
Like any war, it is called geography. One of the major issues in the region was intelligence and reaching the enemy. Remember this, we were very hampered with fly zones in the ME. GWB gave us infrastructure in the ME, airfields, bases, hospitals, etc. Saddam HUSSEIN rolled out the red carpet with his international defiance, why not take the opportunity. I think we are seeing right now how important OWNING GEOGRAPHY is, unfortunately because of Obama’s lack of warrior intellect, we have lost everything in the ME and we will be revisited someday on our shores. Leaving Iraq will prove to be the beginning of the next deadly terrorist attack in the US.
+1 and ditto on the points.
Bush 41 went into Iraq thinking he could stabilize the region and thus oil supply and oil prices.
Bush 43 went into Iraq to get even with saddam hussein for
making Bush 41 look bad.
IMHO, the net result now will be the US begging Iran to take control of Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. Iran will not stop. A nuclear Iran eventually will expand wherever they want.
All that is happening now is just a smoke screen to give Iran time to build up their nuclear arsenal.
“6. Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, other than Saddam celebrating it’
Nonsense.
To believe that you have to be too ignorant to know the 9/11 attack was an attack against the economy and the 9/11 attack was preceded by an orchestrated recession which was directly related to the Oil for Food Program and the smuggling of Iraqi oil driving the price of oil so low it created a worldwide recession.
The 9/11 attack was a 1-2 punch. Orchestrate a recession then attack the economic center.
SH even made a comment a few month before 9/11 something to the effect “soon America will be hit in it’s sore arm” meaning the economy.
SH played a big part in the preparations for the 9/11 attack.
If the threat of WMD's and terrorism was so high, why didn't they militarize the Southern borders.
It simply wasn't there.
Illegal aliens have raped, killed, robbed, and harmed more Americans than Al Qaeda has ever done, we get a 9/11 each year in total destruction from them, yet we choose not to stop it.
So yeah, in the end Saddam was a great stabilizer in the area. He had to pick on his neighbors to show his force and control. It worked for him.
If future generations learn anything from this epoch in American history that point should be it. Future leaders (assuming we have any with fortitude) need to remember it, before committing US blood towards any cause.
Post 8 is spot on IMO. Plus Sadaam’s Iraq was a natural foe of Iran. We made a mistake to invade Iraq under GWB when Iran was more of the snake’s head.
Look at a map.
A base right in the very middle of every Middle East trouble spot is as effective as bases we keep in Germany to keep Europe quiet. Just like bases in South Korea makes Asia a much quieter neighborhood.
Saddam was an enabler of terrorists of every stripe. He not only supported them but gave them cover. He developed WMD which every intelligence agency in the West knew and proclaimed (probably sent to Syria), and defied the US and UN for 12 years prior to the invasion.
I believe Saddam or Iraqi security forces were intimately involved with 911 and the coinciding Anthrax attacks.