Replies

The last six years of the Obama administration have demonstrated why he was right about the Iraq war but for all the wrong reasons. I admit I was wrong about the Iraq war (I supported it) but contend my error or made was for all the right reasons.

The wrong reasons which motivated Obama are simply he does not want American foreign policy to prosper, he does not want American power extended, in fact, he wants it eclipsed, reduced and ultimately eliminated. He opposed the Iraq war not because he foresaw all the problems which erupted during the occupation after the initial crushing victory but because he opposed the extension of American power.

America, after all, is the greatest bulwark against the encroach of statism, communism, Islam, one world government.

So, the analogy to Yalta seems to me to be inapposite because Obama does not believe he can manage the Iranians as Roosevelt wrongly believed he could manage Stalin, Obama simply wants to refrain from extending American power and in fact welcomes a counterforce which would emerge with a nuclear Iran. He does not want to manage the Iranians he wants to enable them. And he wants to enable them because he believes their view of the world is superior to the traditional American Weltanschauung.

Is Obama motivated because he is a closet Muslim? Is he motivated because he is a communist? Is he simply motivated because the enemy of my enemy is my friend? Is he simply making common cause against an enemy? Who can tell. Whatever the man is, he is profoundly dangerous to the security of America.

Th eiraq war was the reight thing to do. The problem is that we never finished it. We crushed tehri initial capability but refused to fix the problem there.

Japan’s problem during WWII was not just their military, it was their culture. We stayed in control of Japan long enough to change their culture. And we actively worked to change that culture.

We did not do that in Iraq. We never set out to crush radical islam because we were too afraid to crush islam. And more and more of us can now see (as Ann Coulter and the rest of us saw at once) that all islam is radical islam.

We needed to conquer them, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We left the job only 1/2 done and now we will have to conquer them again.

Only when islam ceases to exist in a country is that country ready to stand on it’s own. (Even if that takes killing 75% or more of the country’s population. You can’t cure a cancer by asking it to be nice, you have to kill every last cancer cell find and then strengthening the body to fight kill any you missed)

I admit I was wrong about the Iraq war (I supported it) but contend my error or made was for all the right reasons.

I would like to argue that you were right, but I cannot make that case. Given what happened with the "Arab Spring", it seems likely that any Iraqi government other than a long-term strongman like Saddam would have been destabilized and overthrown those for whom Obama feels sympathy, as happened with Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Yemen, and the other Arab unrest. Saddam's removal made instability inevitable once Obama took power, and there was no better strategy, better tactics, better set of objectives, or other improvement that could have led to a less negative outcome than the status quo ante.

I'd like to say that once we have a president who supports America we can go back in Iraq and fix the mess we made, but that is not realistic. Another war in Iraq would have even less support than our recent war, and the opposition would be more motivated to hold out and wait for a new president who would walk away from Iraq. We can't fix the mess we made, and it's going to be both a negative precedent for the world and a major, unsolvable regional problem for a long time.