Reply to: “The only error in your thinking is the way you present the 2003 invasion of Iraq as a continuum dating back to the first Gulf War in 1990-91. You are correct in describing it this way, but that doesn’t necessarily make it justifiable. In fact, when the Saudi influence in radical Islam started getting some scrutiny after 9/11, a lot of people began to wonder about something I’ve contended since 1990 — that perhaps the U.S. was on the wrong side in Desert Storm.”
While the decision to go to war at the beginning of 1991 is debatable, I’m going to have to disagree with you about it. We were on the right side of that one, and (what is not the same) getting involved was the right thing to do. Saddam Hussein had just conquered Kuwait, and looked to be preparing to invade Saudi Arabia. The Saudis deserve all the criticism they’ve gotten, for their support of Wahhabism. But letting Saddam Hussein take over the whole region, would have been a disaster, especially for Europe. We are partially insulated from European problems by an ocean, but anything that hits Europe that hard would be a disaster for the United States, as well. Shutting Saddam down was the right thing to do, in spite of the costs of war.
Thank you....it was the best explanation to date. I gave up trying
Please let me add, I do not have the respect for G.W. Bush the way I had it during his Presidency. The influence of NWO on that family has created a different way of thinking. It was disappointing to see how Bill Clinton has infiltrated that family. I was never a fan of Jeb Bush.
G.W.’s Christianity does not come thru to me the way it did during his time in office....not sure why! Maybe the constant media attacks or pressure caused him to change his mind about some things....sad.