The 12-Year War (The costs of "containing" Saddam include the rise of Osama bin Laden)

WSJ.com ^ | March 18, 2003 | Unknown

[conservativecorner]

Amid the fog of diplomacy these past few months, it has been easy to lose sight of American purposes in Iraq. But as President Bush reminded us last night, the imminent war to liberate the world from Saddam Hussein is both just and necessary.

[JohnGalt]

"Osama's jihad--and therefore September 11 itself--is in other words one direct consequence of the past 12 years of U.S. "containment" of Saddam"


Finally, even the WSJ concurs that paleo-cons and paleo-libs were correct in 1990 that terrorism is an unintended consequence of foreign wars. Perhaps they will understand why we are curious that the same people who's decision making capabilities, Cheney/Perle/Wolfowitz/Powell, led to 9/11, were not thrown on the ash heap of history for their gross incompetence. Clearly, these folks are not fit to be setting foreign policy anymore so than leftists are fit to run social policy.

[grobdriver]

The first President Bush rallied the world to roll that invasion back but failed to seize the moment to gain a permanent victory

Sorry to see that even the WSJ has forgotten why we didn't go get Saddam back then - that there was no such mission - the whinny crybabies who could not bear the "Highway of Death" and "why are we still killing them".
They would have come apart had we kept on down the road, Colin Powell and the arabs in the coalition would have balked, saying "that's not what we signed up for".
I'm so tired of the blame G.H.W. Bush gets for not moving on Saddam then.